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 .
Claims 1-10 are currently pending in the present application.
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)(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.
Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Oh (US 20240236452).
Re: claim 1, Oh discloses a support base 210 (Figs. 5, 7); a lens barrel (Figs. 5, 7, the housing portion of lens 220) suspended at an inner side of the support base (suspension disclosed in Fig. 5); and an adjustment mechanism comprising an Auto Focus (AF) assembly 460, 450, 430, 470, 480, 410 (Fig. 7; para 154 discloses auto focus), an Optical Image Stabilizer (OIS) assembly 300 (Fig. 7; para. 144 discloses hand shake correction function), an elastic sheet assembly 700, 710, 720 (Fig. 9; paras. 207, 210 disclose elastic material), and a flexible connection plate 310, 600 (para. 145 discloses connection to image sensor 330, para. 185 discloses that 310 and 600 may be formed integrally and that 600 is flexible) disposed below the support base 210 (disposition disclosed in Fig. 7); wherein the OIS assembly comprises an OIS circuit board 495, 310 (Fig. 7 discloses IC 495 as being mounted on PCB 310 where para. 145 discloses that 310 is a PCB, para. 182 discloses that IC 495 is disposed in element 310) disposed between to the support base 140, 210 and the flexible connection plate 310, 600 (disposition disclosed in Fig. 7); a sensor 330 is provided at a center of the OIS circuit board (Fig 7 & para. 145 discloses that sensor 330 is disposed in the hole of OIS circuit board portion 310); and the connection plate comprises a first connection portion 310 connected to the sensor 330 (para. 149 discloses connection).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 3 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oh.
Re: claim 3, Oh discloses the limitations of claim 1, and Oh further discloses that the OIS circuit board 495, 310 is a planar FPC (para. 145 discloses PCB, Fig. 7 discloses planar, and para. 185 discloses that 310 and 600 may be formed integrally and that 600 is flexible), While Oh does not explicitly disclose that the flexible connection plate is made of a titanium-copper alloy material, it has been held that the selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use is a prima facie indicator of obviousness (MPEP § 2144.07).
Re: claim 10, Oh discloses the limitations of claim 1, and Oh further discloses a housing 110, 120 130, 140, 340 (Fig. 4), wherein the housing comprises a first housing 140 arranged outside the support base 210 (arrangement disclosed in Fig. 4), and a second housing 340 arranged below the first housing and configured to receive the OIS circuit board 310, 495 and the flexible connection plate 310, 600 (arrangement & configuration disclosed in Fig. 5). While Oh does not explicitly disclose a gasket being provided between the second housing and an edge of the flexible connection plate, the utilization of a gasket to seal components to prevent fluid intrusion would have been a well-known technique to a person of ordinary skill in the art at a time prior to the effective date. Hence, the claim limitation is the obvious application of a known technique to a known device that yields predictable results.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2 and 4-9 are 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANGELA MEDICH whose telephone number is (313)446-4819. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10:00 AM - 7:00 PM ET.
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, Jennifer Carruth can be reached at 571-272-9791. 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.
/ANGELA M. MEDICH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2871