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) was submitted on 10/16/2024. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because in line four “fixed par” should be “fixed part”. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claim 1 is provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-2 of copending Application No. 18/768,209 (U.S. Patent Application Publication US 2025/0028143 A1). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other as explained in the table below:
Instant Application 18/417,378
US 2025/0028143 A1
1. A driving mechanism for moving an optical element, the driving mechanism comprising:
a fixed part;
a movable part, wherein the optical element is disposed on the movable part;
a driving assembly, driving the movable part to move relative to the fixed part;
and
a first guiding member, disposed between the fixed part and the movable part, wherein the movable part is guided by the first guiding member when moving relative to the fixed part.
1. A driving mechanism for moving an optical element that has an optical axis, the driving
mechanism comprising:
a fixed part;
a movable part, movably connected to the fixed part for holding the optical element; and
a driving assembly, configured for moving the movable part relative to the fixed part.
2. The driving mechanism as claimed in claim 1, further comprising a first guiding member
disposed on the fixed part and connected to the movable part for guiding the movable part to move relative to the fixed part along the optical axis.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
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.
(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.
(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.
Claims 1-7 and 9-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Suzuki et al., US 2023/0341651 A1 (hereinafter referred to as Suzuki).
As to claim 1, Suzuki teaches a driving mechanism for moving an optical element (Suzuki, Fig. 1, 101, paragraph [0051], “a lens driving device 101”), the driving mechanism comprising:
a fixed part (Suzuki, Fig. 2, FB, paragraph [0053], “a fixed member FB”);
a movable part, wherein the optical element is disposed on the movable part (Suzuki, Fig. 2, MB, paragraph [0053], “the movable member MB includes a lens-retaining member 2”);
a driving assembly, driving the movable part to move relative to the fixed part (Suzuki, Fig. 2, PD, paragraph [0057], “the piezoelectric driving portion PD is configured to move the lens-retaining member 2 along the optical-axis direction”);
and
a first guiding member, disposed between the fixed part and the movable part, wherein the movable part is guided by the first guiding member when moving relative to the fixed part (Suzuki, Fig. 2, 5L, paragraphs [0053] and [0062]-[0065], “the movable member MB is configured to be guided in an optical-axis direction by a guide mechanism GM,” a ball 5 is held between the movable member and the fixed member, “specifically, the guide mechanism GM includes… a left-hand guide portion GML… a left-hand ball 5L disposed between the left-hand movable member-side groove 2GL and the left-hand fixed member-side groove 7GL,” the balls 5L are considered the first guiding member).
As to claim 2, Suzuki teaches all the limitations of the instant invention as detailed above with respect to claim 1, and Suzuki further teaches the driving mechanism as claimed in claim 1, wherein the fixed part includes a housing and a polygonal base connected to each other, the movable part is movably received in the housing (Suzuki, Fig. 1A, HS, paragraph [0054], “the cover member 1 has a box-shaped outer shape defining a housing portion 1S. In the housing portion 1S, the movable member MB can be housed. Also, the cover member 1 is bonded to the base member 7 with an adhesive, thereby forming a casing HS with the base member 7,” paragraph [0069], “the lens driving device 101 has an outer shape of a generally rectangular parallelepiped shape”), and the base has a first side (Suzuki, Fig. 1A, X1, paragraph [0052], “X1 side of the lens driving device 101 corresponds to a front side (front-face side) of the lens driving device 101”), a second side (Suzuki, Fig. 1A, Y1, paragraph [0052], “a Y1 side of the lens driving device 101 corresponds to a left-hand side of the lens driving device 101”), a third side (Suzuki, Fig. 1A, X2, paragraph [0052], “X2 side of the lens driving device 101 corresponds to a back side (rear-face side) of the lens driving device 101”), and a fourth side (Suzuki, Fig. 1A, Y2, paragraph [0052], “Y2 side of the lens driving device 101 corresponds to a right-hand side of the lens driving device 101”), wherein the first and third sides are parallel to each other, and the second and fourth sides are parallel to each other (Suzuki, Fig. 1A, 1A, paragraph [0054], an outer peripheral wall portion 1A is rectangular).
As to claim 3, Suzuki teaches all the limitations of the instant invention as detailed above with respect to claim 2, and Suzuki further teaches the driving mechanism as claimed in claim 2, wherein the base has a first column (Suzuki, Fig. 6A, 7BL, paragraphs [0065]-[0066], “a surface (top surface) of the base member 7 on the subject side (Z1 side) is provided with two columnar portions 7B,” the left-hand tubular portion 7BL of the base member 7 is considered the first column), the movable part has a first recessed portion (Suzuki, Fig. 10A, 2GL, paragraph [0062], “a left-hand movable member-side groove 2GL”), and the first guiding member is disposed between the first column and the first recessed portion (Suzuki, Fig. 6A, GML, paragraph [0065], “a left-hand ball 5L disposed between the left-hand movable member-side groove 2GL and the left-hand fixed member-side groove 7GL,” the left-hand balls 5L are considered the first guiding member).
As to claim 4, Suzuki teaches all the limitations of the instant invention as detailed above with respect to claim 3, and Suzuki further teaches the driving mechanism as claimed in claim 3, wherein the first recessed portion has a first contact surface and a second contact surface in contact with the first guiding member, and the first contact surface is not parallel to the second contact surface (Suzuki, Fig. 9B, 2GL, as shown in the annotated figure 9B below, the first recessed portion 2GL has first and second contact surfaces that are not parallel to each other).
PNG
media_image1.png
826
1003
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As to claim 5, Suzuki teaches all the limitations of the instant invention as detailed above with respect to claim 4, and Suzuki further teaches the driving mechanism as claimed in claim 4, wherein the first and second contact surfaces are not parallel to the first and second sides of the base (Suzuki, Suzuki, Fig. 9B, 2GL, as shown in the annotated figure 9B above, the first and second contact surfaces are not parallel to the first X1 and second Y1 sides of the base).
As to claim 6, Suzuki teaches all the limitations of the instant invention as detailed above with respect to claim 5, and Suzuki further teaches the driving mechanism as claimed in claim 4, wherein the first recessed portion further has a third contact surface and a fourth contact surf ace in contact with the first guiding member, and the third contact surface is not parallel to the fourth contact surface (Suzuki, Fig. 9B, 2GL, as shown in the annotated figure 9B above, the first recessed portion 2GL has third and fourth contact surfaces that are not parallel to each other).
As to claim 7, Suzuki teaches all the limitations of the instant invention as detailed above with respect to claim 6, and Suzuki further teaches the driving mechanism as claimed in claim 6, wherein the first and second contact surfaces are in a different position from the third and fourth contact surfaces along an optical axis of the optical element (Suzuki, Fig. 9B, 2GL, as shown in the annotated figure 9B above, the first and second contact surfaces are located further in the Z1 direction than the third and fourth contact surfaces).
As to claim 9, Suzuki teaches all the limitations of the instant invention as detailed above with respect to claim 3, and Suzuki further teaches the driving mechanism as claimed in claim 3, further comprising a second guiding member (Suzuki, Fig. 2, 5RU, paragraphs [0053] and [0062]-[0065], “the movable member MB is configured to be guided in an optical-axis direction by a guide mechanism GM,” a ball 5 is held between the movable member and the fixed member, “specifically, the guide mechanism GM includes… a right-hand guide portion GMR… a right-hand ball 5R disposed between the right-hand movable member-side groove 2GR and the right-hand fixed member-side groove 7GR. The right-hand ball 5R includes an upper right-hand ball 5RU,” the ball 5RU is considered the second guiding member), wherein the base further has a second column (Suzuki, Fig. 6A, 7BR, paragraphs [0064] and [0066], “a surface (top surface) of the base member 7 on the subject side (Z1 side) is provided with two columnar portions 7B,” the right-hand tubular portion 7BR of the base member 7 is considered the second column), and the movable part further has a second recessed portion (Suzuki, Fig. 10A, 2GR, paragraph [0062], “a right-hand movable member-side groove 2GR”), wherein the second guiding member is disposed between the second column and the second recessed portion (Suzuki, Fig. 6A, GMR, paragraph [0064], “a right-hand ball 5R disposed between the right-hand movable member-side groove 2GR and the right-hand fixed member-side groove 7GR. The right-hand ball 5R includes an upper right-hand ball 5RU,” the upper right-hand ball 5RU is considered the second guiding member).
As to claim 10, Suzuki teaches all the limitations of the instant invention as detailed above with respect to claim 10, and Suzuki further teaches the driving mechanism as claimed in claim 9, wherein the second recessed portion has a first sidewall parallel to the first side of the base and in contact with the second guiding member (Suzuki, Figs. 7A, 7B, and 9B, 2BR, 7VRU, paragraphs [0062] and [0083], the fixed member-side groove 7GR is divided into two recessed portions 7V which includes a right-hand upper recessed portion 7VRU and a right-hand lower recessed portion 7VRD, the right-hand upper ball 5RU is housed in the right-hand upper recessed portion 7VRU. As shown in the annotated figure 9B, the second recessed portion 2BR has a first sidewall that is parallel to the first side of the base X1, and as shown in figure 7B the first sidewall contacts the right-hand upper ball 5RU. Note: although figure 9B shows the left-hand tubular portion 2BL, the tubular portion 2B of the lens-retaining member 2 is symmetric about the X axis, thus the right-hand tubular portion 2BR has similar sidewalls to the left-hand tubular portion 2BL).
PNG
media_image2.png
860
1003
media_image2.png
Greyscale
As to claim 11, Suzuki teaches all the limitations of the instant invention as detailed above with respect to claim 10, and Suzuki further teaches the driving mechanism as claimed in claim 10, wherein the second recessed portion further has a second sidewall, a third sidewall, a fourth sidewall, and a fifth sidewall that are not in contact with the second guiding member and the second column , the second sidewall is connected between the first and third sidewalls, and the fourth sidewall is connected between the third and fifth sidewalls (Suzuki, Figs. 7A, 7B, and 9B, 2BR, 7VRU, paragraphs [0062] and [0083], the fixed member-side groove 7GR is divided into two recessed portions 7V which includes a right-hand upper recessed portion 7VRU and a right-hand lower recessed portion 7VRD, the right-hand upper ball 5RU is housed in the right-hand upper recessed portion 7VRU, thus the right-hand upper ball 5RU is maintained in the right-hand upper recessed portion 7VRU and does not contact the right-hand lower recessed portion 7VRD. As shown in the annotated figure 9B above the second recessed portion 2GR has second, third, fourth and fifth sidewalls, the second, third, fourth and fifth sidewalls are not in contact with the right-hand upper ball 5RU because they are located adjacent to the right-hand lower recessed portion 7VRD which does not house the right-hand upper ball 5RU).
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.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Suzuki et al., US 2023/0341651 A1 (hereinafter referred to as Suzuki).
As to claim 8, Suzuki teaches all the limitations of the instant invention as detailed above with respect to claim 6, and Suzuki further teaches the driving mechanism as claimed in claim 6, wherein the first column has a first abutting surface and a second abutting surface in contact with the first guiding member (Suzuki, Figs. 7A-8B, 7VLU, paragraph [0085], the annotated figure 8B below shows the first abutting surface located on the Y1 side of the left-hand upper recessed portion 7VLU, figure 7A shows a symmetric second abutting surface located on the Y2 side of the left-hand upper recessed portion 7VLU, figure 7B shows the upper left-hand ball 5LU housed in the left-hand upper recessed portion 7VLU), the first abutting surface is parallel to the second and fourth contact surfaces of the first recessed portion (Suzuki, Figs. 8B and 9B, 7VLU, 2GL, figures 8B and 9B show the first abutting surface having similar surface angles in the Y1 direction as the second and fourth contact surfaces), the second abutting surface is parallel to the first and third contact surfaces of the first recessed portion (Suzuki, Figs. 8B and 9B, 7VLU, 2GL, figures 8B and 9B show the second abutting surface having similar surface angles in the Y1 direction as the first and third contact surfaces).
The prior art and the instant claim differ by the shape of the first abutting surface is parallel to the second and fourth contact surfaces of the first recessed portion, and the first abutting surface is parallel to the second and fourth contact surfaces of the first recessed portion.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the angle of the first and second abutting surfaces such that they are parallel to the second and fourth contact surfaces and first and third contact surfaces, respectively, since it has been held that a mere change in shape of an element is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art when the change in shape is not significant to the function of the combination, In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966), MPEP §2144.04(IV)(B). In the instant case, the change in shape does not appear to be significant to the function because the guiding mechanism as described enables the lens-retaining member 2 to smoothly move along the optical-axis direction (Suzuki, paragraph [0086]).
PNG
media_image3.png
821
1023
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Claims 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Suzuki et al., US 2023/0341651 A1 (hereinafter referred to as Suzuki), and further in view of Lim et al., US 2020/0050084 A1 (hereinafter referred to as Lim).
As to claim 13, Suzuki teaches all the limitations of the instant invention as detailed above with respect to claim 9. Suzuki does not teach the driving mechanism as claimed in claim 9, wherein the first and second columns are located at opposite corners of the base.
However, in the same field of endeavor Lim teaches a driving mechanism (Lim, Figs. 1 and 2, 200, 300, paragraph [0053], “a camera module includes a lens module 200, and driving unit 300 moving the lens module 200”), wherein the first and second columns are located at opposite corners of the base (Lim, Fig. 6, 410, 420, paragraph [0123], “the housing 400 is provided with a first guide protrusion 410 and a second guide protrusion 420”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the driving mechanism of Suzuki where the first and second columns are located at opposite corners of the base of Lim, because tilt may be prevented from occurring when a lens module is moved in an optical axis direction (Lim, paragraph [0129]).
As to claim 14, Suzuki teaches all the limitations of the instant invention as detailed above with respect to claim 9. Suzuki does not teach the driving mechanism as claimed in claim 9, wherein at least a part of the second column is received in the second recessed portion.
However, in the same field of endeavor Lim teaches a driving mechanism, wherein at least a part of the second column is received in the second recessed portion (Lim, Fig. 6, 410, 231, paragraph [0123], the housing is provided with a first guide protrusion 410… and the lens module 200 is provided with a first guide groove 231 into which the first guide protrusion 410 is inserted”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the driving mechanism of Suzuki where at least a part of the second column is received in the second recessed portion of Lim, because tilt may be prevented from occurring when a lens module is moved in an optical axis direction (Lim, paragraph [0129]).
Claims 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Suzuki et al., US 2023/0341651 A1 (hereinafter referred to as Suzuki), and further in view of Kodama et al., US 2025/0164854 A1 (hereinafter referred to as Kodama).
As to claim 15, Suzuki teaches all the limitations of the instant invention as detailed above with respect to claim 9. Suzuki does not teach the driving mechanism as claimed in claim 9, wherein the first and second guiding members are longitudinal rods.
However, in the same field of endeavor Kodama teaches a driving mechanism (Kodama, Fig. 1, 101, paragraph [0029], “lens driving apparatus 101, a lens body LS”), wherein the first and second guiding members are longitudinal rods (Kodama, Fig. 2, 4, paragraph [0030], “a guide shaft 4… the movable member MB is configured to be guided in an optical axis direction by a guide mechanism GM”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the driving mechanism of Suzuki where the first and second guiding members are longitudinal rods of Kodama, because doing so allows the movable member to be guided in an optical axis direction (Kodoma, paragraph [0030]).
As to claim 16, Suzuki teaches all the limitations of the instant invention as detailed above with respect to claim 9. Suzuki does not teach the driving mechanism as claimed in claim 9, further comprising a magnetic permeable element, wherein the driving assembly includes a magnet disposed on the fixed part and a coil disposed on the movable part, and the magnetic permeable element is disposed on a first end surface of the movable part and located between the coil and the first end surface.
However, in the same field of endeavor Brodie teaches a driving assembly (Brodie, Fig. 1, 100, paragraph [0048], “voice coil motor (VCM) actuator module 100”), wherein the driving assembly includes a magnet disposed on the fixed part and a coil disposed on the movable part (Brodie, Fig. 1, 116, 108, paragraph [0050], the coil structure 110 includes a base structure 112 and folded portion 114, the folded portions 114 include coils 116, and the base portion 112 is arranged on the lens carrier 106,” thus the coils are disposed on the movable part and the magnets 108 are disposed on the fixed part).
However, in the same field of endeavor Kim teaches the magnetic permeable element is disposed on a first end surface of the movable part and located between the coil and the first end surface (Kim, Fig. 1, 21, 25, 27, paragraphs [0043]-[0046], the camera module 100 includes a magnet 21, a coil 25, and a yoke 27).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the driving assembly of Suzuki where the driving assembly includes a magnet disposed on the fixed part and a coil disposed on the movable part of Brodie, because doing so delivers functions such as autofocus, optical image stabilization, and/or tilt while delivering a very compact actuator (Brodie, paragraph [0028]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the driving assembly of Suzuki where the magnetic permeable element is disposed on a first end surface of the movable part and located between the coil and the first end surface of Kim because, the tilted state of the optical axis of the lens with respect to the image formation surface of the image sensor may be adjusted so as to be included within the preset range (Kim, paragraph [0167]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Kim et al., US 2015/0103240 A1, Camera Module, Method for Aligning Optical Axis of Camera Module and Portable Electronic Device Including Camera Module, relevant to claims 1-5.
Park et al., US 2018/0026515 A1, Lens Moving Apparatus and Camera Module Including Same, relevant to claims 1-5 and 13-16.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JENNIFER A JONES whose telephone number is (703)756-4574. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8 AM - 5 PM.
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, Thomas Pham can be reached at 571-272-3689. 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.
JENNIFER A JONES
Examiner
Art Unit 2872
/JENNIFER A JONES/ Examiner, Art Unit 2872
/THOMAS K PHAM/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2872