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 7/27/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding independent claim 1, the applicant states that Kawano fails to disclose an interval in the main scanning direction. However, under the new interpretation of the disclosure of Kawano, Kawano discloses the interval in the main scanning direction, as detailed in the rejection of claim 1 below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1, 4, 10-13, 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kawano et al (US Publication No.: US 2013/0155472 A1 of record, “Kawano”).
Regarding Claim 1, Kawano discloses an image reading device that optically reads an object as an image capture target (Figures 4-5; Paragraph 0083), comprising:
A plurality of light receiving parts arrayed regularly (Figure 4, light receiving parts 41/42; Paragraph 0086);
A first light blocking member including a plurality of first openings arrayed corresponding respectively to the plurality of light receiving parts (Figure 4, first light blocking member 101); and
A plurality of microlenses arrayed corresponding respectively to the plurality of first openings, the plurality of microlenses being formed integrally on a same plane (Figure 5, microlenses 100), wherein
Each light receiving part included in the plurality of light receiving parts includes a plurality of light receiving pixels arrayed in a first direction as a main scanning direction (Figure 4, 212 is the main scanning direction; Paragraph 0103 discloses a plurality of pixels, where Figures 15-18 disclose the plurality of pixels arrayed in a main scanning direction 212 (Y)),
Each microlens included in the plurality of microlenses is object side telecentric (Paragraph 0038 discloses that the microlenses are object side telecentric),
The plurality of microlenses are arrayed in a zigzag pattern (Figures 5-6 disclose a zigzag pattern for the microlenses beginning with bottom lens 102 to top lens 103),
The plurality of microlenses, the first light blocking member, and the plurality of light receiving parts are arranged so that light reflected by the object and passing through the microlens and the first opening corresponding to the microlens enters the plurality of light receiving pixels included in the light receiving part corresponding to the first opening (Figures 5-6 discloses light entering the light receiving pixels in 41/42), and
An interval between central positions of two microlenses adjoining in the first direction among the plurality of microlenses is equal to a width of the microlens in the first direction as a visual field range of the microlens (Figure 18; Paragraph 0106).
Regarding Claim 4, Kawano discloses the image reading device according to claim 1, further comprising a first glass member having a surface on which the first light blocking member is provided and a surface on which the plurality of microlenses are provided (Figure 5, glass member 3 comprises a bottom surface on which the first light blocking member and microlenses are provided; Paragraph 0087).
Regarding Claim 10, Kawano discloses the image reading device according to claim 1, wherein the plurality of light receiving parts are arrayed in one line (Figures 1-5 discloses light receiving parts 41/42 arrayed in one line).
Regarding Claim 11, Kawano discloses the image reading device according to claim 1, wherein the plurality of light receiving parts include a plurality of light receiving parts in a first line and a plurality of light receiving parts in a second line arrayed at different positions in a direction orthogonal to the first direction, and each light receiving parts including in the plurality of light receiving parts in the second line is arranged between two light receiving parts adjoining in the first direction among the plurality of light receiving parts in the first line (Figure 4 discloses staggered first and second lines of first and second light receiving parts 41/43/45/42/44).
Regarding Claim 12, Kawano discloses the image reading device according to claim 1, wherein the plurality of light receiving pixels are arrayed like a matrix (Figure 4 discloses an array like a matrix for the light receiving parts 41/42/43/44/45).
Regarding Claim 13, Kawano discloses the image reading device according to claim 1, further comprising a second light blocking member provided between the first light blocking member and the plurality of microlenses and including a plurality of second openings corresponding respectively to the plurality of microlenses, wherein each of the first light blocking member and the second light blocking member is formed from a metal plate (Figure 16, second light blocking member 126).
Regarding Claim 15, Kawano discloses the image reading device according to claim 13, further comprising a fourth light blocking member connecting a first light blocking part as a part of the first light blocking member excluding the plurality of first openings and a second light blocking part as a part of the second light blocking member excluding the plurality of second openings together (Figure 16, fourth light blocking member 126).
Regarding Claim 16, Kawano discloses the image reading device according to claim 13, further comprising a glass member having a surface in contact with the first light blocking member and a surface in contact with the second light blocking member (Kawano, Figure 5, glass member 3).
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.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kawano.
Regarding Claim 3, Kawano discloses the image reading device according to claim 1. Kawano fails to explicitly disclose that wherein let Po represent the interval between the central positions of the two adjoining microlenses, N represent a number of the plurality of light receiving pixels in the first direction included in each of the light receiving parts, and r represent a resolution of the image reading device in the first direction, Po=N*r is satisfied.
However, Kawano discloses a general environment of improving resolution and optimizing central positions between two adjoining microlenses (Kawano, Paragraph 0123; Paragraph 0124; Paragraph 0090). When a limitation of a claim is a result-effective variable, i.e., a variable which when modified achieves a recognized result, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges for the variable by routine experimentation (MPEP 2144.05). In the instant claim recitation, the limitation regarding the central position is the result-effective variable, and when this position is optimized to the appropriate value within the specified parameters of a given device, the recognized results of improving resolution are realized. While Kawano does not directly disclose the relationship between the central position, resolution, and number of light receiving pixels, Kawano does disclose the general conditions recited in the instant claim, as noted above. In light of the disclosure of Kawano, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to discover the limitation by routine experimentation that wherein let Po represent the interval between the central positions of the two adjoining microlenses, N represent a number of the plurality of light receiving pixels in the first direction included in each of the light receiving parts, and r represent a resolution of the image reading device in the first direction, Po=N*r is satisfied for the purpose of improving image resolution.
Claims 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kawano in view of Fujimoto et al (US Publication No.: US 2001/0028506 A1 of record, “Fujimoto”).
Regarding Claim 5, Kawano discloses the image reading device according to claim 4.
Kawano fails to disclose a second light blocking member provided on a surface of the first glass member on the object's side and including a plurality of second openings corresponding respectively to the plurality of microlenses, wherein an opening width of each second opening included in the plurality of second openings in the first direction is smaller than an external diameter of the microlens.
However, Fujimoto discloses a similar image reading device comprising a second light blocking member provided on a surface of the first glass member on the object's side and including a plurality of second openings corresponding respectively to the plurality of microlenses, wherein an opening width of each second opening included in the plurality of second openings in the first direction is smaller than an external diameter of the microlens (Fujimoto, Figure 7, second light blocking member 3; Paragraph 0074).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device as disclosed by Kawano to include a second light blocking member as disclosed by Fujimoto. One would have been motivated to do so for the purpose of optimizing light transmission for image formation (Fujimoto, Paragraph 0075).
Regarding Claim 6, Kawano discloses the image reading device according to claim 1.
Kawano fails to disclose a third light blocking member are provided on the plurality of light receiving parts’ side relative to the first light blocking member and including a plurality of third openings corresponding respectively to the plurality of light receiving parts.
However, Fujimoto discloses a similar device where a third light blocking member are provided on the plurality of light receiving parts’ side relative to the first light blocking member and including a plurality of third openings corresponding respectively to the plurality of light receiving parts (Fujimoto, Figure 17, third light blocking member 5, light receiving parts 21; Paragraph 0103).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device as disclosed by Kawano to include a third light blocking member as disclosed by Fujimoto. One would have been motivated to do so for the purpose of optimizing light transmission for image formation (Fujimoto, Paragraph 0103).
Regarding Claim 7, Kawano in view of Fujimoto discloses the image reading device according to claim 6, further comprising a second glass member having a surface on which the third light blocking member is provided (Kawano, Figure 5, second glass member 3; Paragraph 0087).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8-9, 14 are allowed.
Regarding independent claim 8, the prior art of record does not teach or suggest an image reading device that optically reads an object as an image capture target, comprising: a plurality of light receiving parts arrayed regularly; a first light blocking member including a plurality of first openings arrayed corresponding respectively to the plurality of light receiving parts; and a plurality of microlenses arrayed corresponding respectively to the plurality of first openings, wherein each light receiving part included in the plurality of light receiving parts includes a plurality of light receiving pixels arrayed in a first direction as a main scanning direction, each microlens included in the plurality of microlenses is object side telecentric, and the plurality of microlenses, the first light blocking member and the plurality of light receiving parts are arranged so that light reflected by the object and passing through the microlens and the first opening corresponding to the microlens enters the plurality of light receiving pixels included in the light receiving part corresponding to the first opening, the image reading device further comprising a first substrate on which the plurality of light receiving parts are arranged, wherein the plurality of light receiving parts include: first light receiving parts as the light receiving parts respectively arranged at positions closest to ends of the first substrate in the first direction; second light receiving parts as the light receiving parts other than the first light receiving parts, and a number of the plurality of light receiving pixels included in the first light receiving part is greater than a number of the plurality of light receiving pixels included in the second light receiving part, in combination with the remaining features recited in the claim.
The prior art of Kawano (US 2013/0155472 A1) discloses An image reading device that optically reads an object as an image capture target, comprising: a plurality of light receiving parts arrayed regularly; a first light blocking member including a plurality of first openings arrayed corresponding respectively to the plurality of light receiving parts; and a plurality of microlenses arrayed corresponding respectively to the plurality of first openings, wherein each light receiving part included in the plurality of light receiving parts includes a plurality of light receiving pixels arrayed in a first direction as a main scanning direction (Kawano, Figures 1-5). However, Kawano fails to disclose that the plurality of light receiving parts include: first light receiving parts as the light receiving parts respectively arranged at positions closest to ends of the first substrate in the first direction; second light receiving parts as the light receiving parts other than the first light receiving parts, and a number of the plurality of light receiving pixels included in the first light receiving part is greater than a number of the plurality of light receiving pixels included in the second light receiving part. The prior art of Fujimoto (US 2001/0028506 A1) discloses an imaging device comprising a plurality of microlenses. However, Fujimoto also fails to disclose particular light receiving parts.
Therefore, Claim 8 is allowed. Claim 9 is allowed by virtue of its dependence on claim 8.
Regarding Claim 14, the prior art of record does not teach or suggest an image reading device that optically reads an object as an image capture target, comprising: a plurality of light receiving parts arrayed regularly; a first light blocking member including a plurality of first openings arrayed corresponding respectively to the plurality of light receiving parts; and a plurality of microlenses arrayed corresponding respectively to the plurality of first openings, the plurality of microlenses being formed integrally on a same plane; a second light blocking member provided between the first light blocking member and the plurality of microlenses and including a plurality of second openings corresponding respectively to the plurality of microlenses; and a spacer member connecting the first light blocking member and the second light blocking member, wherein each of the first and second light blocking members are formed from a metal plate, each light receiving part included in the plurality of light receiving parts includes a plurality of light receiving pixels arrayed in a first direction as a main scanning direction, each microlens included in the plurality of microlenses is object side telecentric, and the plurality of microlenses, the first light blocking member and the plurality of light receiving parts are arranged so that light reflected by the object and passing through the microlens and the first opening corresponding to the microlens enters the plurality of light receiving pixels included in the light receiving part corresponding to the first opening, in combination with the remaining features recited in the claim.
The prior art of Kawano (US 2013/0155472 A1) discloses an image reading device that optically reads an object as an image capture target, comprising: a plurality of light receiving parts arrayed regularly; a first light blocking member including a plurality of first openings arrayed corresponding respectively to the plurality of light receiving parts; and a plurality of microlenses arrayed corresponding respectively to the plurality of first openings, wherein each light receiving part included in the plurality of light receiving parts includes a plurality of light receiving pixels arrayed in a first direction as a main scanning direction and first and second light blocking members (Kawano, Figures 1-5). However, Kawano fails to disclose a spacer member connecting the first and second light blocking members. The prior art of Fujimoto (US 2001/0028506 A1) discloses an imaging device comprising a plurality of microlenses. However, Fujimoto also fails to disclose a spacer member connecting the first light blocking member and the second light blocking member, wherein each of the first and second light blocking members are formed from a metal plate.
Therefore, Claim 14 is allowed.
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 MARIAM QURESHI whose telephone number is (571)272-4434. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-5PM EST 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, Michael Caley can be reached at 571-272-2286. 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.
/MARIAM QURESHI/Examiner, Art Unit 2871
Prosecution Insights