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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim recites the limitation “the second section” and “the first section” in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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.
Claims 1, 7-13 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wang et al.(US 20220121025 A1 hereinafter Wang).
Regarding claim 1, Wang discloses an optical element driving mechanism, in figure 2, comprising: a movable portion (MA, figure 2) used to connect an optical element; a fixed portion (FA, figure 2), wherein the movable portion (MA) movable relative to the fixed portion (FA); and a driving assembly (DA, figure 2) used to drive the movable portion (108 and 110 of MA moveable along or parallel to axis Y) to move relative to the fixed portion (FA) in a first axis (Y)(figure 2), wherein the driving assembly (DA1/DA2) is arranged along a second axis (MG1, CL1, CM1 arranged along Z axis, figure 2), and the second axis (Y) is perpendicular to the first axis (Z)(par.[0052-0056]).
Regarding claims 7-9, Wang discloses the optical element driving mechanism as claimed in claim 1, further comprising a linkage assembly, wherein when the movable portion moves relative to the fixed portion, the optical element is driven to move via the linkage assembly, and the optical element is movable relative to the movable portion (1082); wherein the linkage assembly includes: a linkage element (holder 1081) having a protruding structure (on top of the holder 1081); and an opening structure (an opening on element 1082) corresponding to the linkage element; wherein the linkage assembly overlaps a sidewall of the fixed portion (figure 2).
Regarding claim 10, Wang discloses the optical element driving mechanism as claimed in claim 1, wherein the driving assembly comprises: a magnetic element (MG1/MG2); and a coil (CL1/CL2) corresponding to the magnetic element (MG1/MG2), wherein the magnetic element (MG1/MG2) is disposed on either of the movable portion (108) and the fixed portion (112), and the coil is disposed on the other of the movable portion and the fixed portion (par.[0063-0064]).
Regarding claim 11, Wang discloses the optical element driving mechanism as claimed in claim 10, wherein the driving assembly (DA1/DA2) further comprises a magnetically permeable element (reference CM1, figure 2) used to generate a magnetic attraction force with the magnetic element, and the coil (CL1/CL2) surrounds the magnetically permeable element (CM1).
Regarding claims 12 and 13, Wang discloses the optical element driving mechanism as claimed in claim 11, wherein the magnetically permeable element is exposed from a bottom surface of the fixed portion, and a top surface of the fixed portion covers the magnetically permeable element; wherein when the fixed portion comprises a base, the base () has a first groove and a second groove separated from each other, the coil (CL1/CL2) is disposed in the first groove, and the magnetic element (MG1/MG2) is disposed in the second groove (base 112 having multiple groove for storing the magnetic element and the coil)(figure 2).
Regarding claim 18, Wang discloses the optical element driving mechanism as claimed in claim 1, wherein the fixed portion (FA)(figure 2) comprises an outer frame (102), the outer frame (102) has a top surface (TW)(figure 2) and a sidewall (SW)(figure 2) extending from the top surface, and the sidewall is not parallel to the top surface.
Regarding claims 19 and 20, Wang discloses the optical element driving mechanism as claimed in claim 18, wherein an angle between the sidewall (SW) and the top surface (TW) is less than 90 degrees; wherein the fixed portion (FA) comprises a base (112), and the base (112) has a receiving groove corresponding to a profile of the sidewall of the outer frame (102)(figure 2).
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.
Claims 2, 3, 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al.(US 20220121025 A1) as applied to claim 1, in view of Hu et al.(US 20210149143 A1).
Regarding claim 2, Wang discloses the optical element driving mechanism as claimed in claim 1. However, Wang does not disclose a guiding assembly, wherein the movable portion is movable in the first axis relative to the fixed portion via the guiding assembly, and the guiding assembly comprises: a first guiding assembly; and a second guiding assembly in contact with and movable relative to the first guiding assembly, wherein a first contact surface of the first guiding assembly contacts a second contact surface of the second guiding assembly, wherein in a second axis, a maximum dimension of the first contact surface is different from a maximum dimension of the second contact surface, and the second axis is perpendicular to the first axis (par.[0009]). Hu et al. is in same field of endeavor and teaches a guiding assembly, wherein the movable portion is movable in the first axis relative to the fixed portion via the guiding assembly, and the guiding assembly comprises: a first guiding assembly; and a second guiding assembly in contact with and movable relative to the first guiding assembly, wherein a first contact surface of the first guiding assembly contacts a second contact surface of the second guiding assembly, wherein in a second axis, a maximum dimension of the first contact surface is different from a maximum dimension of the second contact surface, and the second axis is perpendicular to the first axis (par.[0537], [0564]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before effective filing date of the claimed invention, to apply teachings of guiding assembly of Hu et al. to device of Wang et al. for purpose of guiding the movable assembly.
Regarding claim 3, Wang et al. and Hu et al. disclose the optical element driving mechanism as claimed in claim 2, wherein the second guiding assembly further comprises: a first positioning portion having a first positioning surface, wherein the first positioning surface faces the first guiding assembly, except for an angle formed between the first positioning surface and the second contact surface is between 15 degrees and 60 degrees. However, it is noted that the court has held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation; see In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the device of Hu to have an angle formed between the first positioning surface and the second contact surface is between 15 degrees and 60 degrees in order to optimize the performance.
Regarding to claims 15-17, Wang discloses the optical element driving mechanism as claimed in claim 1. However, Wang does not disclose a circuit assembly electrically connected to the driving assembly, wherein the circuit assembly comprises a first contact and a second contact, and the first contact and the second contact are respectively located on opposite sides of a coil of the driving assembly, wherein the circuit assembly includes a plurality of segments embedded in the fixed portion, and the segments extend in different directions, wherein the segments comprise a first segment adjacent to the first contact and a second segment adjacent to the second contact, and in a third axis perpendicular to the first axis and the second axis. Hu et al. is in same field of endeavor and teaches a circuit assembly electrically connected to the driving assembly, wherein the circuit assembly comprises a first contact and a second contact, and the first contact and the second contact are respectively located on opposite sides of a coil of the driving assembly, wherein the circuit assembly includes a plurality of segments embedded in the fixed portion, and the segments extend in different directions, wherein the segments comprise a first segment adjacent to the first contact and a second segment adjacent to the second contact, and in a third axis perpendicular to the first axis and the second axis (par.[0141], [0161], [0275]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before effective filing date of the claimed invention, to apply teachings of guiding assembly of Hu et al. to device of Wang et al. for purpose of guiding the movable assembly.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-6 and 14 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: (claim 4) wherein the second guiding assembly further comprises a second positioning portion having a second positioning surface, wherein the second positioning surface faces the first guiding assembly, the second positioning surface is not parallel and not perpendicular to the first positioning surface; (claim 14) a guiding assembly, wherein the movable portion is movable in the first axis relative to the fixed portion via the guiding assembly, and the guiding assembly is located between the first groove and the second groove.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TUYEN TRA whose telephone number is (571)272-2343. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10-6.
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.
/TUYEN TRA/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872