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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 9-25-23 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 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.
Claims 1-8 and 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being fully anticipated by Kim et al. (US20180176431).
Re claim 1, Kim et al. teaches for example in fig. 1-8 and 16, a thermal lens set, comprising: an imaging lens set (fig. 1) comprising an inner lens group (fig. 1; lenses within 100) and an outer lens group (10; fig. 1; lens sitting atop 100) which comprises at least one outer lens element (10; fig. 1); a heater (500) to heat the imaging lens set (abstract) and comprising at least two portions (512, 530; fig. 2, 3), wherein one of the at least two portions is in direct contact with the imaging lens set (fig. 1); and a lens barrel (at least 100 and 200) to accommodate another one of the at least two portions (fig. 1, 5).
Re claim 2, Kim et al. further teaches for example in fig. 1-8 and 16, the at least two portions of the heater comprise a non-thermal zone (520; para. 0065) and a thermal zone (510; para. 0062) with a heating element (512).
Re claim 3, Kim et al. further teaches for example in fig. 1-8 and 16, the at least one outer lens element is in direct contact with the heating element (fig. 1; para. 0063).
Re claim 4, Kim et al. further teaches for example in fig. 1-8 and 16, the inner lens group comprises a plurality of inner lens elements (fig. 1) and the heating element is disposed between the outer lens group and the inner lens group (fig. 1).
Re claim 5, Kim et al. further teaches for example in fig. 1-8 and 16, a shape of the thermal zone is selected from a group consisting of an annular shape (fig. 3) and a crescent shape.
Re claim 6, Kim et al. further teaches for example in fig. 1-8 and 16, the at least two portions of the heater comprises a plurality of thermal zones comprising a plurality of heating elements (para. 0114; wherein the examiner interprets “at least one” to teach a minimum requirement of one, allowing for exactly one or any higher number and therefore teaches the claimed limitation).
Re claim 7, Kim et al. further teaches for example in fig. 1-8 and 16, a sensor (1200) disposed in the non-thermal zone (para. 0139) and electrically connected to the heating element (para. 0139-0142).
Re claim 8, Kim et al. further teaches for example in fig. 1-8 and 16, the lens barrel comprises a body comprising a space to accommodate the sensor (para. 0139).
Re claim 10, Kim et al. further teaches for example in fig. 1-8 and 16, the lens barrel comprises a seal ring disposed between the outer lens group and the inner lens group (para. 0045).
Re claim 11, Kim et al. further teaches for example in fig. 1-8 and 16, the lens barrel comprises a seal ring disposed between the heating element and the inner lens group (para. 0045).
Re claim 12, Kim et al. further teaches for example in fig. 1-8 and 16, a cap (top portion of 200; fig. 1, 5) to accommodate the at least one outer lens element (fig. 1, 5).
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 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 of this title, 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 9 and 13-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US20180176431).
Re claim 9, supra claim 7. Furthermore, Kim et al. further teaches for example in fig. 1-8 and 16, the lens barrel comprising a flange (fig. 1) comprising a space (fig. 1) and the lens barrel accommodates the sensor (para. 0139).
But, Kim et al. fails to explicitly teach a flange comprising a space to accommodate the sensor.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to vary the location of the sensing unit, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering obvious design choices involves only routine skill in the art.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the teachings of Kim et al. in order to provide a position close to the lens to sense at least one of external humidity or temperature, as taught by Kim et al. (para. 0139).
Re claim 13, supra claim 7. Furthermore, Kim et al. further teaches for example in fig. 1-8 and 16, the sensor (1200; para. 0139).
But, Kim et al. fails to explicitly teach a thermal-sensitive resistor.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to vary the sensing unit, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering obvious design choices involves only routine skill in the art.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the teachings of Kim et al. in order to provide a sensor close to the lens to sense at least one of external humidity or temperature, as taught by Kim et al. (para. 0139).
Re claim 14, supra claim 7. Furthermore, Kim et al. further teaches for example in fig. 1-8 and 16, the sensor (1200; para. 0139).
But, Kim et al. fails to explicitly teach a surface mount device (SMD).
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to vary the sensing unit, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering obvious design choices involves only routine skill in the art.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the teachings of Kim et al. in order to provide a sensor close to the lens to sense at least one of external humidity or temperature, as taught by Kim et al. (para. 0139).
Re claim 15, supra claim 2. Furthermore, Kim et al. further teaches for example in fig. 1-8 and 16, the heating element has an outer diameter D1 and an inner diameter D2 (fig. 3).
But, Kim et al. fails to explicitly teach (D1−D2)/2≥0.8 mm.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to vary the diameter ratio of the heating element, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the teachings of Kim et al. in order to provide a camera module capable of preventing frost from being adhered to a lens by providing a heater which occupies a small area, as taught by Kim et al. (para. 0012).
Re claim 16, supra claim 2.
But, Kim et al. fails to explicitly teach a temperature difference between the thermal zone and the non-thermal zone is not less than 40° C. after 1 minute of activating the heating element.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to vary the temperature, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the teachings of Kim et al. in order to provide a camera module capable of preventing frost from being adhered to a lens by providing a heater which occupies a small area, as taught by Kim et al. (para. 0012).
Re claim 17, supra claim 3.
But, Kim et al. fails to explicitly teach a temperature difference between the outer lens group and the inner lens group is not less than 20° C. after 1 minute of activating the heating element.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to vary the temperature, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the teachings of Kim et al. in order to provide a camera module capable of preventing frost from being adhered to a lens by providing a heater which occupies a small area, as taught by Kim et al. (para. 0012).
Re claim 18, supra claim 1. However, it has been held that a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitations.
Re claim 19, supra claim 1. Furthermore, Kim et al. further teaches for example in fig. 1-8 and 16, a method to remove a mist from a lens set, comprising: providing a thermal lens set, wherein the heater comprises a non-thermal zone and a thermal zone which comprises a heating element in direct contact with the outer lens group which has a mist thereon; and activating the heater so that a temperature (para. 0139-0143).
But, Kim et al. fails to explicitly teach a temperature difference between the outer lens group and the inner lens group is not less than 20° C. after 1 minute of activating the heater to at least partially remove the mist.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to vary the temperature, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the teachings of Kim et al. in order to provide a camera module capable of preventing frost from being adhered to a lens by providing a heater which occupies a small area, as taught by Kim et al. (para. 0012).
Re claim 20, Kim et al. further teaches for example in fig. 1-8 and 16, (para. 0139).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSEPH P MARTINEZ whose telephone number is (571)272-2335. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 9am to 7pm PACIFIC.
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, Bumsuk Won can be reached at (571) 272-2713. 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.
/Joseph P Martinez/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872 2-14-26