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 § 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(s) 1, 5-11, and 14-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koji (United States Patent Application Publication 20130286566 A1) in view of Yamaguchi (EP 3441804 A1).
With respect to claims 1, 14 and 15 Koji discloses an electronic component (see fig.3A) comprising an electronic device (see fig.3A, 100) and a container (see the container of 20 and 30 in fig.3A) configured to house the electronic device (see 100 in fig.3A), wherein the container (see 20 and 30 in fig.3A) includes a support (20 in fig.3A) configured to support the electronic device (see 100 in fig.2), and a quartz plate (see the crystal quartz of 30: para.[0034]: “a lid body 30 is… quartz crystal.”) having a principal plane (302) facing the electronic device, but does not disclose an angle θ formed by the principal plane (302) and an optical axis of the quartz plate satisfies 3°<|θ|< 30° or 60°<|θ| and |θ|< 87°.
Yamaguchi teaches utilizing a range of 3°<|θ|< 30° or 60°< |θ|<87° for uniaxial material (see 4 in fig.1, (.e.g. rock crystal) (see fifth para. under Description of Embodiments: Depending on the material and a phase difference to be set, the tilt angle θ may be set within the range of 10° or more and no more than 80°)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the electronic component of Koji with the teaching of Yamaguchi so that the range of 3°<|θ|< 30° or 60°< |θ|<87° , to improve image quality by suppressing color moire, and since in this case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990); furthermore, since said modification would predictably lead to a suppression of color moire and since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
With respect to claims 5 and 7, Koji in view of Yamaguchi discloses the electronic component according to claim 1 but does not explicitly disclose wherein a coefficient of linear expansion of the support is not less than 6 ppm and is less than 10 ppm, or wherein a coefficient of linear expansion of the support is not less than 10 ppm and is less than 14 ppm.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify Koji in view of Yamaguchi so that wherein a coefficient of linear expansion of the support is not less than 6 ppm and is less than 10 ppm, or wherein a coefficient of linear expansion of the support is not less than 10 ppm and is less than 14 ppm, since it would predictably facilitate the control of material stress and since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
With respect to claims 6 and 8, Koji discloses in view of Yamaguchi discloses the electronic component according to claims 6 and 8, Koji in combination with Yamaguchi discloses the optical axis of the quartz plate satisfies 3°<|θ|< 30° or 60°<|θ| and |θ|< 87° (Yamaguchi teaches utilizing a range of 3°<|θ|< 30° or 60°< |θ|<87° for uniaxial material (see 4 in fig.1) (.e.g. rock crystal) (see fifth para. under Description of Embodiments: Depending on the material and a phase difference to be set, the tilt angle θ may be set within the range of 10° or more and no more than 80°)).
With respect to claim 9, Koji in view of Yamaguchi discloses the electronic component according to claim 1, Koji discloses wherein the electronic device serves as an image capturing device (see para.[0025]: The type of the electronic device 10 is not particularly limited; however, is typically an optical device. The electronic device 10 of this example includes a main part 1 and a sub-part 2. The main part 1 is typically located at the center of the electronic device 10, and the sub-part 2 is typically located in the periphery of the main part 1. If the electronic device 10 is an image pickup device, such as a charge-coupled device (CCD) image sensor or a complementary metal-oxide semiconductor (CMOS) image sensor, the main part 1 is an image pickup region. If the electronic device 10 is a display device, such as a liquid crystal display or an electroluminescence (EL) display, the main part 1 is a display region. In the case of the image pickup device, the front surface 101 being a facing surface of the electronic device 10 facing the lid body 30 serves as a light incidence surface.).
With respect to claim 10, Koji in view of Yamaguchi discloses the electronic component according to claim 1, Koji discloses wherein the electronic device serves as a display device (see para.[0025]: The type of the electronic device 10 is not particularly limited; however, is typically an optical device. The electronic device 10 of this example includes a main part 1 and a sub-part 2. The main part 1 is typically located at the center of the electronic device 10, and the sub-part 2 is typically located in the periphery of the main part 1. If the electronic device 10 is an image pickup device, such as a charge-coupled device (CCD) image sensor or a complementary metal-oxide semiconductor (CMOS) image sensor, the main part 1 is an image pickup region. If the electronic device 10 is a display device, such as a liquid crystal display or an electroluminescence (EL) display, the main part 1 is a display region. In the case of the image pickup device, the front surface 101 being a facing surface of the electronic device 10 facing the lid body 30 serves as a light incidence surface.).
With respect to claims 11, 16 and 17, Koji discloses an apparatus (see fig.3A) comprising: an electronic component (see 101 in fig.3A); and a controller (see para.[0025]: “The sub-part 2 has a driving circuit that drives the main part 1, and a signal processing circuit that processes a signal from the main part 1 (or a signal to the main part 1). If the electronic device 10 is a semiconductor element, such circuits are easily formed in a monolithic manner. The sub-part 2 has electrodes 3 (electrode pads) that allow the electronic device 10 to exchange signals with an external device.”) configured to control the electronic component (see 10 in fig.3A), wherein the electronic component includes an electronic device (see fig.3A, 100) and a container (see the container of 20 and 30 in fig.3A) configured to house the electronic device (see 100 in fig.3A), wherein the container (see 20 and 30 in fig.3A) includes a support (20 in fig.3A) configured to support the electronic device (see 100 in fig.2), and a quartz plate (see the crystal quartz of 30) having a principal plane (302) facing the electronic device, but does not disclose an angle θ formed by the principal plane (302) and an optical axis of the quartz plate satisfies 3°<|θ|< 30° or 60°<|θ| and |θ|< 87°.
Yamaguchi teaches utilizing a range of 3°<|θ|< 30° or 60°< |θ|<87° for uniaxial material (see 4 in fig.1) (.e.g. rock crystal) (see fifth para. under Description of Embodiments: Depending on the material and a phase difference to be set, the tilt angle θ may be set within the range of 10° or more and no more than 80°).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the electronic component of Koji with the teaching of Yamaguchi so that the range of 3°<|θ|< 30° or 60°< |θ|<87° , to improve image quality by suppressing color moire, and since in this case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990); furthermore, since said modification would predictably lead to a suppression of color moire and since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
With respect to claims 18 and 19, Koji in view of Yamaguchi discloses the electronic component according to claims 1 and 11, Koji discloses wherein the electronic device has a front surface (see 101 in fig.3A), wherein the container defines an internal space between the quartz plate (see 30 in fig.3A) and the electronic device (see 100 in fig.3A), and wherein the principal plane (see 302 in fig.3A) is defined by a surface of the quartz plate that faces the front surface of the electronic device across at least part of the internal space (see the space between 302 and 101 in fig.3A).
Claim(s) 2-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koji (United States Patent Application Publication 2013/0286566 A1) in view of Yamaguchi (EP 3441804 A1) and Katase (United States Patent Application Publication 2018/0269336 A1)
With respect to claims 2-4, Koji in view of Yamaguchi discloses the electronic component according to claim 1, Koji does not disclose wherein a thickness of the quartz plate in a direction perpendicular to the principal plane is not less than 0.2 mm and is not more than 0.5 mm, wherein the principal plane has a rectangular shape, and
wherein a long side of the rectangle is perpendicular to the optical axis, wherein the principal plane has a rectangular shape, and wherein a short side of the rectangle is perpendicular to the optical axis.
Katase discloses wherein a thickness of the quartz plate in a direction perpendicular to the principal plane is not less than 0.2 mm and is not more than 0.5 mm ([0054] While the examples of the shape of the crystal quartz 30 have been described in the first to fourth embodiments, it is preferable for the thickness of the crystal quartz 30 in the direction perpendicular to the outer face 301 and the inner face 302 to be greater than or equal to 0.2 mm and less than or equal to 1.0 mm in each embodiment. ), wherein the principal plane has a rectangular shape (see the rectangular shape of fig.1), and a long side of the rectangle is perpendicular to the optical axis (see the orientation of Cz in fig.2B; para.[0042]: the longer side direction of the outer face 301 and the inner face 302 is parallel to the electric axis Cx. ; thus the long side which is parallel to Cx is perpendicular to Cz, since Cx is perpendicular to Cz), wherein the principal plane has a rectangular shape (see the rectangular shape of fig.1), and a short side of the rectangle is perpendicular to the optical axis ([0042]: However, the embodiment is not limited thereto, and the shorter side direction of the outer face 301 and the inner face 302 may be parallel to the electric axis Cx. The relationship of the shorter sides and the longer sides of the outer face 301 and the inner face 302 to the electric axis Cx can be selected properly from various points of view such as in terms of the optimal number of crystal quartzes 30 cut out of a crystal quartz ingot. ; thus the short side which is parallel to Cx is perpendicular to Cz, since Cx is perpendicular to Cz).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Koji in view of Yamaguchi with the teaching of Katase so that a thickness of the quartz plate in a direction perpendicular to the principal plane is not less than 0.2 mm and is not more than 0.5 mm, wherein the principal plane has a rectangular shape, and wherein a long side of the rectangle is perpendicular to the optical axis, wherein the principal plane has a rectangular shape, and wherein a short side of the rectangle is perpendicular to the optical axis to make the device more compact and versatile.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-11 and 14-19 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on rejection applied in the prior office action of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Pertinent Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Sano (United States Patent Application Publication 2007/0070236) disclose an optical axis of the quartz plate satisfies 3°<|θ|< 30° or 60°<|θ| and |θ|< 87°( [0026] According to another aspect; the present invention provides an optical element separating entering light into light rays having polarization directions perpendicular to each other such that the light rays are separated by a specific width and exit from the optical element. The optical element satisfies the following condition: 51o < q <61o, where the optical element is made of quartz, and .theta. represents an angle between the direction of an optic axis of the quartz and a normal to an incident surface of the optical element).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JERRY L. BROOKS whose telephone number is (571)270-5711. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00-4:00 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, Toan Ton can be reached at 5712722303. 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.
/JERRY L BROOKS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2882
Prosecution Insights