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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of species D, corresponding to claims 1-5 and 13-15, in the reply filed on 12/18/2025 is acknowledged.
Claims 6-12 and 16-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species A-C and E, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 12/18/2025.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement submitted on 3/21/2024 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 § 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.
Claims 5 and 13-15 are 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.
Claims not specifically addressed in the rejection above inherit the indefiniteness of the claim from which they depend.
Regarding claim 5, lines 5-6 recite “for guiding a moving direction of the movable relative to the fixed portion” which is not coherent. For examination purposes, this limitation shall be read as “guiding a moving direction of the movable portion relative to the fixed portion”
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.
(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 1-2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Ho et al (US 20200249424 A1, hereinafter “Ho”).
Regarding claim 1, Ho discloses an optical element driving mechanism (see ¶s 87-101 regarding Ho’s 2nd group of embodiments – provided are generic details for a base embodiment shown in FIGs. 12-14 and additional/optional details extended to a subsequent embodiment shown in FIGs. 15-16), comprising:
a movable portion (holder 2-LH) used for connecting an optical element;
a fixed portion (housing 2-H + base 2-B), wherein the movable portion (holder 2-LH) is movable relative to the fixed portion (housing 2-H + base 2-B); and
a driving assembly (coils 2-C + magnets 2-M) used for driving the movable portion (holder 2-LH) to move relative to the fixed portion (housing 2-H + base 2-B).
Regarding claim 2, Ho discloses the optical element driving mechanism as claimed in claim 1.
Ho further discloses (see annotated FIGs. 12 and 15 below) wherein:
the movable portion (holder 2-LH) is polygonal (i.e. a truncated rectangle or octagon);
the movable portion (holder 2-LH) comprises a first movable portion side surface, a second movable portion side surface, a third movable portion side surface, a fourth movable portion side surface, a first movable portion corner, a second movable portion corner, a third movable portion corner, a fourth movable portion corner, a first side surface, a second side surface, and a third side surface;
the first movable portion side surface is adjacent to the second movable portion side surface;
the second movable portion side surface is adjacent to the third movable portion side surface;
the third movable portion side surface is adjacent to the fourth movable portion side surface;
the fourth movable portion side surface is adjacent to the first movable portion side surface;
the first movable portion corner is between the first movable portion side surface and the second movable portion side surface;
the second movable portion corner is between the second movable portion side surface and the third movable portion side surface;
the third movable portion corner is between the third movable portion side surface and the fourth movable portion side surface;
the fourth movable portion corner is between the fourth movable portion side surface and the first movable portion side surface;
the fixed portion (housing 2-H + base 2-B) comprises a bottom (base 2-B);
the first side surface, the second side surface, and the third side surface face the bottom (base 2-B);
the first side surface and the second side surface face different directions;
the second side surface and the third side surface face different directions;
the first side surface and the third side surface face an identical direction.
[AltContent: textbox (Ho’s FIG. 15 is annotated to highlight various features, including side surfaces (SSs). Note that each of the 1st, 3rd, and 4th SSs are normal to the horizontal, while the 2nd, 5th, and 6th SSs are inclined with respect to the horizontal.)]
PNG
media_image1.png
656
733
media_image1.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox (Ho‘s FIG. 12 is cropped and annotated to highlight various features, including movable portion side surfaces (MPSSs), movable portion corners (MPCs), and side surfaces (SSs).)]
PNG
media_image3.png
505
1022
media_image3.png
Greyscale
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 Ho, as applied to claim 2 above, and in further view of Yan et al (WO 2024016448 A1, hereinafter “Yan”).
Regarding claim 3, Ho discloses the optical element driving mechanism as claimed in claim 2.
Ho, in the 2nd group of embodiments cited above, does not disclose wherein:
the movable portion comprises a protrusion;
the protrusion is adjacent to the first side surface;
the protrusion is disposed on the second side surface and the third side surface;
the protrusion comprises a plurality of glue recesses and a rib;
the rib is disposed between the glue recesses.
Ho, in a 1st group of embodiments, discloses (see annotated FIG. 2 below) wherein:
the movable portion (moving portion 1-300) comprises a protrusion;
the protrusion is adjacent to the first side surface;
the protrusion is disposed on the second side surface and the third side surface;
PNG
media_image5.png
535
692
media_image5.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox (Ho’s FIG. 2 is annotated to highlight protrusion orientation with respect to some side surfaces (SSs).)]
Ho and Yan are commonly related to optical driving apparatuses.
Yan discloses (see FIGs. 5-6, 8 and ¶s 40-42, 61-69) the protrusion (fixing structure 21) comprises a glue recess (glue groove 212) and a rib (protrusion 211);
Ho in view of Yan thus disclose the invention substantially as claimed, failing only to disclose:
a plurality of glue recesses;
the rib is disposed between the glue recesses.
However, Examiner finds these features distinguish the claimed invention from the combined teachings of Ho and Yan merely by specifying a greater number of recesses.
It would have therefore been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine basic design aspects of Ho’s (1st, 2nd) groups of embodiments, including known protrusion structures, in order to tune the associated coupling mechanics and accommodate different device configurations that can facilitate more desirable performance (see also regarding Ho’s 4th group of embodiments, e.g. in ¶s 136 and 141-148, detailing different arrangements of protrusions and buffering elements that are involved in different stopping/damping configurations).
It would have further been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to also modify Ho with Yan’s glue recess, in order to provide damping sources with good stability (Yan ¶s 3-6, 61).
It would have lastly been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to then increase the number recesses for greater damping effect/stability – since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ho in view of Yan, as applied to claim 3 above, and in further view of Schemer et al (EP 3992491 A1, hereinafter “Schemer”).
Regarding claim 4, modified Ho discloses the optical element driving mechanism as claimed in claim 3.
Ho, in the 2nd group of embodiments cited above, further discloses wherein:
the bottom (base 2-B) comprises a fourth side surface, a fifth side surface, and a sixth side surface facing the movable portion (holder 2-LH);
the fourth side surface faces the first side surface;
the sixth side surface faces the third side surface;
the fourth side surface and the first side surface are parallel;
the fourth side surface and the fifth side surface face in different directions;
the second side surface and the fifth side surface face in different directions;
(with regards to items A-F above, see the previous annotated FIG. 15 above)
a first distance is between the first side surface and the fourth side surface;
a second distance is between the third side surface and the sixth side surface;
the first distance and the second distance are different;
the second side surface is exposed from the movable portion (holder 2-LH) when viewed in a first direction;
the fifth side surface is exposed from the bottom (base 2-B) when viewed in the first direction;
a normal vector of the second side surface is not perpendicular or parallel to the first direction;
a normal vector of the fifth side surface is not perpendicular or parallel to the first direction.
(with regards to items G-M above, see also the newly annotated FIG. 15 below)
[AltContent: textbox (Ho’s FIG. 15 is newly annotated to highlight various features associated with the claimed side surfaces (SSs))]
PNG
media_image7.png
827
882
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Modified Ho does not disclose:
the sixth side surface and the third side surface are parallel;
the fifth side surface and the sixth side surface face in different directions;
the fourth side surface and the sixth side surface face in an identical direction;
Ho and Schemer are commonly related to damping structures.
Schemer discloses (see FIGs 4-6 and ¶s 32-38, 46-49 detailing a bearing bushing 2)
the sixth side surface and the third side surface are parallel;
the fifth side surface and the sixth side surface face in different directions;
the fourth side surface and the sixth side surface face in an identical direction;
(Note, in Schemer’s annotated FIG. 6 below, the third, fourth, and sixth side surfaces all run parallel to one another – satisfying items A and C above.
[AltContent: textbox (Schemer’s FIG. 6 is annotated to highlight side surfaces (SSs))]
PNG
media_image9.png
556
692
media_image9.png
Greyscale
Moreover, to bring Ho’s arrangement in compliance with this arrangement, one needs only to tilt Ho’s sixth side surface – labeled in Ho’s annotated FIG. 15 accompanying claim 2 above – relative to the remaining features. This simultaneously ensures that the fifth and sixth side surfaces face in different directions – i.e. that item B is satisfied as well.)
It would have therefore been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to further modify Ho with design aspects of Schemer, in order to provide more internally supportive structure that can accommodate other design improvements/modifications (e.g. a larger or more form-fitting/space-filling damping element for improved mechanical stability/response – compare, for example, Schemer’s elastomer body 8 (FIG. 6, annotated above) to Ho’s buffer element 2-G (FIGs. 15-16))
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ho in view of Yan and Schemer, as applied to claim 4 above, and in further view of Tsuchiya and Takahashi (US 20160252702 A1, hereinafter “Tsuchiya”)
Regarding claim 5, modified Ho discloses the optical element driving mechanism as claimed in claim 4.
Ho, in the 2nd group of embodiments cited above, also discloses the further comprising:
a damping element (buffer element 2-G) disposed between the movable portion (holder 2-LH) and the fixed portion (housing 2-H + base 2-B) (see FIGs. 15-16); and
and wherein:
the first distance is less than the second distance (see annotated FIG. 15 accompanying claim 4 above);
Yan further discloses (see FIGs. 5-6, 8 and ¶s 61-64):
the damping element (damping adhesive 12) is disposed on the protrusion (fixing structure 21);
the damping element (damping adhesive 12) is disposed in the glue recesses (glue groove 212);
the damping element (damping adhesive 12) is in direct contact with the rib (protrusion 211);
Schemer further discloses:
the damping element (elastomer body 8) is in direct contact with the first side surface, the second side surface, the third side surface, the fourth side surface, the fifth side surface, and the sixth side surface;
(compare Schemer’s elastomer body 8 (FIG. 6, annotated above) to Ho’s buffer element 2-G (FIGs. 15-16); Schemer provides a more form-fitting/space-filling damping element that directly contacts all surrounding side surfaces. Schemer’s incorporation into the modified Ho thus enables the damping element to be in direct contact with first through sixth side surfaces).
Modified Ho does not disclose:
a guiding assembly disposed on the fixed portion and used for guiding a moving direction of the movable relative to the fixed portion;
the guiding assembly comprises a first guiding element and a second guiding element;
the first guiding element and the second guiding element are disposed on a virtual plane;
the virtual plane is parallel to the main axis.
Ho and Tsuchiya are commonly related to optical driving apparatuses.
Tsuchiya discloses (see FIG. 4a, annotated below, and ¶s 65-68 detailing a conventional lens driving apparatus; see also FIGs. 1-3 and ¶s 54-64 detailing Tsuchiya’s lens driving apparatus and generally introducing several relevant features):
a guiding assembly (support unit 4) disposed on the fixed portion (cover 1) and used for guiding a moving direction of the movable (bobbin 2) relative to the fixed portion (cover 1);
the guiding assembly (support unit 4) comprises a first guiding element (balls 43) and a second guiding element (balls 43);
the first guiding element (balls 43) and the second guiding element (balls 43) are disposed on a virtual plane;
[AltContent: textbox (Tsuchiya’s FIG. 4a is annotated to highlight various features)]
PNG
media_image11.png
670
817
media_image11.png
Greyscale
the virtual plane is parallel to the main axis (i.e. extending out of the page in FIG. 4a).
It would have therefore been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to further modify Ho with support features of Tsuchiya, in order to provide guidance and stability to the driving apparatus (Tsuchiya ¶ 9).
Claims 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ho in view of Yan, Schemer, and Tsuchiya, as applied to claim 5, and in further view of Hu et al (CN 215264252 U, hereinafter “Hu”)
Regarding claim 13, modified Ho discloses the optical element driving mechanism as claimed in claim 5.
Ho, in the 2nd group of embodiments cited above, further discloses wherein the driving assembly (coils 2-C + magnets 2-M) comprises:
a first magnetic element (magnet 2-M) disposed on the fixed portion (housing 2-H + base 2-B) (see ¶ 94); and
a first driving coil (coil 2-C) disposed on the second movable portion side surface (see annotated FIG. 12 above);
Modified Ho does not disclose the optical element driving mechanism further comprises:
a third magnetic element disposed on the first movable portion side surface;
a fourth magnetic element disposed on the third movable portion side surface; and
a first magnetic permeable element disposed on the fixed portion.
Ho and Hu are commonly related to optical driving apparatuses.
Hu discloses the optical element driving mechanism (100(B)) further comprises:
a third magnetic element (first magnetic element 142) disposed on the first movable portion side surface;
a fourth magnetic element (first magnetic element 142) disposed on the third movable portion side surface; and
a first magnetic permeable element (magnetically conductive element 174) disposed on the fixed portion (fixing part F1).
[AltContent: textbox (Hu’s FIG. 1 (left panel) and FIG. 15 (right panel) are annotated to highlight various features)]
PNG
media_image13.png
652
1401
media_image13.png
Greyscale
(See FIGs. 1-7 and ¶s 99-114 detailing base features of optical element driving mechanism 100. See also FIG. 15 and ¶ 125 regarding a subembodiment 100B. FIGs. 1+15 are annotated below)
It would have therefore been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to further modify Ho with design aspects of Hu, in order to increase or provide an otherwise appropriate/desirable distribution of magnetic forces (Hu ¶s 104, 125)
Regarding claim 14, modified Ho discloses the optical element driving mechanism as claimed in claim 13.
Hu further discloses (see annotated FIG. 1+15 above) wherein:
the third magnetic element (first magnetic element 142) is disposed on the first movable portion corner;
the fourth magnetic element (first magnetic element 142) is disposed on the second movable portion corner;
Tsuchiya further discloses (see annotated FIG. 4a above):
the first guiding element (balls 43) is disposed on the second movable portion side surface;
the second guiding element (balls 43) is disposed on the second movable portion side surface;
the first guiding element (balls 43) is disposed on the first movable portion corner;
the second guiding element (balls 43) is disposed on the second movable portion corner.
Regarding claim 15, modified Ho discloses the optical element driving mechanism as claimed in claim 14.
Ho, in the 2nd group of embodiments cited above, further discloses (see annotated FIG. 12 above) wherein:
the movable portion (holder 2-LH) and the first magnetic element (magnet 2-M) are disposed on opposite sides of the first driving coil (coil 2-C);
Hu further discloses (see annotated FIG. 1+15 above) wherein:
the first magnetic permeable element (magnetically conductive element 174) and the first driving coil are disposed on opposite sides of the first magnetic element;
(Note regarding item A above: as noted previously, Ho provides the first driving coil (coil 2-C) on an interior moving portion side (holder 2-LH side) of the first magnetic element (magnet 2-M); see annotated FIG. 12’s second moving portion side surface above. Hu further provides the first magnetic permeable element (first magnetic element 142) on the fixed portion (fixing part F1) exterior to the second moving portion side surface; see annotated FIG. 1+15 above. Together, Ho incorporating Hu thus enable the above limitation A to be satisfied)
the third magnetic element (first magnetic element 142) lies to one side (on the X-axis) of the first magnetic permeable element (magnetically conductive element 174) in a third (Y) axis;
the fourth magnetic element (first magnetic element 142) lies to another side (on the X-axis) of the first magnetic permeable element (magnetically conductive element 174) in the third (Y) axis;
the third magnetic element (first magnetic element 142) and the fourth magnetic element (first magnetic element 142) are arranged in a fourth (X) axis;
the third (Y) axis and the fourth (X) axis are perpendicular;
a minimum distance (i.e. along the X-axis) between the third magnetic element (first magnetic element 142) and the fourth magnetic element (142) is greater than a length of the first magnetic permeable element (magnetically conductive element 174) in the fourth (X) axis.
Modified Ho thus discloses the invention substantially as claimed, but does not disclose:
the third magnetic element at least partially overlaps the first magnetic permeable element in a third axis;
the fourth magnetic element at least partially overlaps the first magnetic permeable element in the third axis;
a minimum distance between the third magnetic element and the fourth magnetic element is less than a length of the first magnetic permeable element in the fourth axis.
However, Examiner finds these features distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art merely by specifying a longer first magnetic permeable element such that the above geometric constraints are satisfied.
It would have therefore been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to further modify Ho by increasing the size of the first magnetic permeable element, in order to provide guide/confine magnetic flux lines through a larger area of the driving assembly and reduce magnetic saturation or leakage, thereby improving magnetic driving efficiency – since it has been held that mere changes in size or shape are generally within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 220 F.2d 459, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
Double Patenting
A rejection based on double patenting of the “same invention” type finds its support in the language of 35 U.S.C. 101 which states that “whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process... may obtain a patent therefor...” (Emphasis added). Thus, the term “same invention,” in this context, means an invention drawn to identical subject matter. See Miller v. Eagle Mfg. Co., 151 U.S. 186 (1894); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Ockert, 245 F.2d 467, 114 USPQ 330 (CCPA 1957).
A statutory type (35 U.S.C. 101) double patenting rejection can be overcome by canceling or amending the claims that are directed to the same invention so they are no longer coextensive in scope. The filing of a terminal disclaimer cannot overcome a double patenting rejection based upon 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claim 1 is provisionally rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as claiming the same invention as that of claim 1 of copending Applications No. US 18978558, US 18628159, US 18500679. This is a provisional statutory double patenting rejection since the claims directed to the same invention have not in fact been patented.
Instant application (US 18462707)
Copending Applications No.
US 18978558, US 18628159, US 18500679,
1. An optical element driving mechanism, comprising:
a movable portion used for connecting an optical element;
a fixed portion, wherein the movable portion is movable relative to the fixed portion; and
a driving assembly used for driving the movable portion to move relative to the fixed portion.
1. An optical element driving mechanism, comprising:
a movable portion used for connecting an optical element;
a fixed portion, wherein the movable portion is movable relative to the fixed portion; and
a driving assembly used for driving the movable portion to move relative to the fixed portion.
Claims 2-5 and 13-15 depend on claim 1 and thus inherit the same double patenting rejection.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WAI-GA D. HO whose telephone number is (571)270-1624. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday, 10AM - 6PM E.T..
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, Stephone Allen can be reached at (571) 272-2434. 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.
/W.D.H./Examiner, Art Unit 2872
/STEPHONE B ALLEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2872