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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. 16/770,596, filed on June 6th, 2020.
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed August 12th, 2025 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-16 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 1-5 and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Svardal (US 2011/0158617) in view of Choi (US 2012/0081795), further in view of Aschwanden (US 2016/0259094).
Regarding claim 1: Svardal discloses a tunable prism (Figs. 3-4) for optical image stabilization ([0003], “The disclosed technology relates to image stabilization of handheld digital cameras”), comprising the components:
a container ([0032], “A transparent flexible polymer is arranged in a cavity 21 bounded by walls 22, a transparent support 23”, examiner interprets the support 23 and walls 22 to form a container) that comprises a membrane comprising at least a transparent portion ([0032], “a
thin bendable transparent cover 26 (for example a thin glass plate)”), the container further
comprising a transparent rigid portion ([0032], “a transparent support 23”) facing the
membrane, wherein the membrane is connected to the transparent rigid portion ([0032], “A transparent flexible polymer is arranged in a cavity 21 bounded by walls 22 … and a thin bendable transparent cover 26 (for example a thin glass plate)”, examiner interprets the membrane to be attached to the walls),
a transparent window ([0032], “a centrally located transparent prism 25”) arranged on
the membrane ([0032], “a thin bendable transparent cover 26 (for example a thin glass plate)”),
wherein the membrane comprises a deformable portion extending around an outer edge of the
window (as shown in Figs. 3B and 4B, the membrane is deformable),
Svardal does not specifically disclose wherein the container encloses a volume that is filled with a transparent fluid.
However Choi, in the same field of endeavor because both teach tunable prism, teaches wherein the container encloses a volume that is filled with a transparent fluid ([0040], “the lens portion 114 is filled with the optical fluid 125 and serves as a lens through which incident light passes”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to have the range finder of Svardal with the wherein the container encloses a volume that is filled with a transparent fluid as taught by Choi for the purpose of improving the optical performance of the prism ([0040]).
Modified Svardal does not specifically disclose at least one actuator configured to convey a push, a pull or a rotation force acting between the window and the container, such that the window can enclose an angle with the rigid transparent portion.
However Aschwanden, in the same field of endeavor because both teach a tunable prism, teaches at least one actuator (40) configured to convey a push, a pull or a rotation force acting between the window and the container (as shown in Fig. 15, coils 41 and magnets 42 push and pull the window against the container), such that the window can enclose an angle with the rigid transparent portion (as shown in Fig. 15, the window 20 forms an angle with the container).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to have the range finder of Svardal in view of Choi with the at least one actuator configured to convey a push, a pull or a rotation force acting between the window and the container, such that the window can enclose an angle with the rigid transparent portion as taught by Aschwanden, for the purpose of improving the optical performance.
Regarding claim 2, modified Svardal teaches as is set forth in claim 1 rejection above and Svardal further discloses wherein the membrane is sealingly connected with the bottom portion ([0032], “A transparent flexible polymer is arranged in a cavity 21 bounded by walls 22 … and a thin bendable transparent cover 26 (for example a thin glass plate)”, examiner interprets the membrane to be attached to the walls to form a seal).
Regarding claim 3, modified Svardal teaches as is set forth in claim 1 rejection above and Svardal further discloses wherein the tunable prism further comprises the components: a rigid wall member (22), wherein the bottom portion and the wall member are rigidly connected and the membrane is sealingly connected to the wall member ([0032], “A transparent flexible polymer is arranged in a cavity 21 bounded by walls 22 … and a thin bendable transparent cover 26 (for example a thin glass plate)”, examiner interprets the membrane to be attached to the walls to form a seal), wherein the deformable portion of the membrane extends between the outer edge of the window and the wall member (as shown in Figs. 3A-3B, the deformable portion extends between the outer edge of the window and the wall member).
Regarding claim 4, modified Svardal teaches as is set forth in claim 1 rejection above and Svardal further discloses wherein the first and/or the second axis extend parallel to or in a plane of extent of the window (examiner interprets first axis as going into the page of Figs. 3A-3B, examiner interprets second axis as parallel to the page and perpendicular to the first axis), and particularly wherein the first and/or second axis are oriented orthogonally to each other ([0036], “FIGS. 7b and 7c illustrates two dimensional tilting capabilities”).
Regarding claim 5, modified Svardal teaches as is set forth in claim 3 rejection above but does not specifically disclose wherein the wall member comprises at least on a side of the wall member that faces the volume a light-absorbing layer or wherein the wall member consists of a light-absorbing compound.
However Choi, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the wall member (Fig. 3, 110) comprises at least on a side of the wall member that faces the volume a light-absorbing layer or wherein the wall member consists of a light-absorbing compound ([0037], “The spacer frame 110 may be formed using rigid material such as silicon and transparent or opaque material”, examiner interprets opaque material as light absorbing).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to have the range finder of Svardal in view of Choi further in view of Aschwanden with the wherein the wall member comprises at least on a side of the wall member that faces the volume a light-absorbing layer or wherein the wall member consists of a light-absorbing compound as taught by Choi, for the purpose of improving the optical performance.
Regarding claim 15, modified Svardal teaches as is set forth in claim 1 rejection above but does not specifically disclose wherein the window is planar, and the curvature of light traversing the window remains unaltered, such that any image distortion due to focusing or defocusing effects of the window is prevented.
However Aschwanden, in the same field of endeavor because both teach a tunable prism, teaches wherein the window is planar ([0105], “a transparent (e.g. planar) optical element 20”), and the curvature of light traversing the window remains unaltered, such that any image distortion due to focusing or defocusing effects of the window is prevented (as shown in Fig. 1, the curvature of light remains unaltered).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to have the range finder of Svardal in view of Choi further in view of Aschwanden with the wherein the window is planar, and the curvature of light traversing the window remains unaltered, such that any image distortion due to focusing or defocusing effects of the window is prevented as taught by Aschwanden, for the purpose of improving the optical performance.
Regarding claim 16, modified Svardal teaches as is set forth in claim 1 rejection and Svardal further discloses wherein the transparent window is a glass window or the tunable prism comprises a prism- shaping device, wherein the prism-shaping device is the transparent window and the prism shaping device is made of rigid polymer ([0040], “A glass prism 25 may be an integral part of the glass cover 26, or may be assembled onto the glass cover 26 before the glass cover is arranged on top of the side wall matrix and polymer”).
Claims 6-11 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Svardal (US 2011/0158617) in view of Choi (US 2012/0081795), further in view of Aschwanden (US 2016/0259094) and Szilagyi (US 2010/0128357).
Regarding claim 6, modified Svardal teaches as is set forth in claim 1 rejection and Svardal further discloses wherein the tunable prism (Figs. 3-4) comprises a prism-shaping device ([0032], “two piezo electric actuators 24”), wherein the prism-shaping device is in contact with the window ([0032], “a thin bendable transparent cover 26 (for example a thin glass plate) arranged with a centrally located transparent prism 25 in between at least two piezo electric actuators 24”, examiner interprets this to mean that the actuators are in contact with the window 25 via the cover 26), wherein the prism-shaping device has a clear aperture that is particularly arranged centrally over the window (as shown in Fig. 7, the prism shaping devices define an aperture centrally over the window), wherein the prism-shaping device is configured to tilt the window around the first and/or second axis by conveying an actuation force on the window ([0032], “When for example a negative voltage is applied onto one of the two piezo electric actuators, and a positive voltage is applied onto the other piezo electric actuator, the transparent prism 25 is tilted as shown in FIG. 3b”).
Modified Svardal does not specifically disclose conveying an actuation force on the window, particularly on at least one section of the window that is located outside the clear aperture.
However Szilagyi, in the same field of endeavor because both teach a tunable prism, teaches conveying an actuation force ([0025], “Actuation of the yoke may occur, e.g., through magnetic forces developed between the solenoids 108 and permanent magnets 106”) on the window (Figs. 1-3, element 114, [0028], “interposing an optical element (such as a static optical element, an optical flat or window or a glass or plastic lens) between the tilting ring and the membrane on one side of the device”), particularly on at least one section of the window that is located outside the clear aperture (as shown in Fig. 2, the actuation force is applied outside the clear aperture where 108 is outside the aperture of 114).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to have the range finder of Svardal in view of Choi further in view of Aschwanden with the conveying an actuation force on the window, particularly on at least one section of the window that is located outside the clear aperture as taught by Szilagyi for the purpose of improving the performance of the image stabilization ([0025]).
Regarding claim 7, modified Svardal teaches as is set forth in claim 6 rejection above and Svardal further discloses wherein the clear aperture (as shown in Fig. 7, the prism shaping devices define an aperture centrally over the window) of the prism-shaping device is transparent and massive, or wherein the prism-shaping device is transparent and massive (as shown in Figs. 3 and 7, the aperture formed by the prism shaping devices is transparent to let light pass through and massive to allow light to enter).
Regarding claim 8, modified Svardal teaches as is set forth in claim 6 rejection above but does not specifically disclose wherein the prism-shaping device is in contact on two opposite sections of the window, wherein the sections are located outside the clear aperture and wherein the prism-shaping device is configured to convey an actuating force on either section or on both sections.
PNG
media_image1.png
586
553
media_image1.png
Greyscale
However Szilagyi, in the same field of endeavor because both teach a tunable prism, teaches wherein the prism-shaping device (Figs. 1-3, elements 106 and 108) is in contact on two opposite sections of the window (as shown in examiner labeled Fig. 1, the shaping device is in contact at two opposite sections), wherein the sections are located outside the clear aperture (as shown in examiner labeled Fig. 1, the two opposite sections are outside the clear aperture) and wherein the prism-shaping device is configured to convey an actuating force on either section or on both sections ([0025], “Actuation of the yoke may occur, e.g., through magnetic forces developed between the solenoids 108 and permanent magnets 106”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to have the range finder of Svardal in view of Choi, further in view of Aschwanden and Szilagyi with the wherein the prism-shaping device is in contact on two opposite sections of the window, wherein the sections are located outside the clear aperture and wherein the prism-shaping device is configured to convey an actuating force on either section or on both sections as taught by Szilagyi for the purpose of improving the performance of the image stabilization ([0025]).
Regarding claim 9, modified Svardal teaches as is set forth in claim 6 rejection above and Svardal further discloses wherein the prism-shaping device or the window is connected to at least one actuation means that is configured to generate an actuation force for tilting the window around the first and/or the second axis ([0032], “a centrally located transparent prism 25 in between at least two piezo electric actuators 24. When for example a negative voltage is applied onto one of the two piezo electric actuators, and a positive voltage is applied onto the other piezo electric actuator, the transparent prism 25 is tilted as shown in FIG. 3b”).
Regarding claim 10, modified Svardal teaches as is set forth in claim 9 rejection above but does not specifically disclose wherein the prism-shaping device is connected to a movable part that connects the actuation means and the prism-shaping device.
However Szilagyi, in the same field of endeavor because both teach a tunable prism, teaches wherein the prism-shaping device (Figs. 1-3, elements 106 and 108) is connected to a movable part (103 and 104) that connects the actuation means and the prism-shaping device ([0023], “The ring structure with two side arms is referred to herein as a yoke 103 or 104”, as shown in Fig. 2, the side arms connect to 106 for actuation by 108 ).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to have the range finder of Svardal in view of Choi, further in view of Aschwanden and Szilagyi with the wherein the prism-shaping device is connected to a movable part that connects the actuation means and the prism-shaping device as taught by Szilagyi for the purpose of improving the performance of the image stabilization ([0025]).
Regarding claim 11, modified Svardal teaches as is set forth in claim 9 rejection above but does not specifically disclose wherein the at least one actuation means comprises or is a voice coil actuator, the voice coil actuator comprising a magnetic portion and a voice coil portion.
However Szilagyi, in the same field of endeavor because both teach a tunable prism, teaches wherein the at least one actuation means comprises or is a voice coil actuator, the voice coil actuator comprising a magnetic portion and a voice coil portion ([0025], “Actuation of the yoke may occur, e.g., through magnetic forces developed between the solenoids 108 and permanent magnets 106. There are many design variations compatible with embodiments of the present invention. For instance, air-core electromagnets--sometimes called voice coil motors--may be mounted on--and move with the yokes”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to have the range finder of Svardal in view of Choi, further in view of Aschwanden and Szilagyi with the wherein the at least one actuation means comprises or is a voice coil actuator, the voice coil actuator comprising a magnetic portion and a voice coil portion as taught by Szilagyi for the purpose of improving the performance of the image stabilization ([0025]).
Regarding claim 13, modified Svardal teaches as is set forth in claim 9 rejection above but does not specifically disclose wherein the tunable prism comprises a driver circuit configured to control electric currents applied to the at least one actuation means.
However Szilagyi, in the same field of endeavor because both teach a tunable prism, teaches wherein the tunable prism comprises a driver circuit configured to control electric currents applied to the at least one actuation means ([0028], “Another benefit of the second and third variants is that the driving circuit may only need to produce differential signals (i.e. no common mode component to the driving signal may be needed).”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to have the range finder of Svardal in view of Choi, further in view of Aschwanden and Szilagyi with the wherein the tunable prism comprises a driver circuit configured to control electric currents applied to the at least one actuation means as taught by Szilagyi for the purpose of improving the performance of the image stabilization ([0025]).
Claims 12 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Svardal (US 2011/0158617) in view of Choi (US 2012/0081795), further in view of Aschwanden (US 2016/0259094) and Horiuchi (US 5,315,435).
PNG
media_image2.png
589
358
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 12, modified Svardal teaches as is set forth in claim 1 rejection above but does not specifically disclose wherein the tunable prism comprises a gimbal, wherein the window, the prism-shaping device or the movable part is connected to the gimbal such that the window can be tilted around the first and/or the second axis with respect to the bottom portion.
However Horiuchi, in the same field of endeavor because both teach a tunable prism, teaches wherein the tunable prism (Figs. 1-2, V) comprises a gimbal (Col. 3, Lines 5-9, “provided for the end plate 11 through a gimbal mechanism so that desired optical wedges may be formed with respect to all radial directions”), wherein the window, the prism-shaping device or the movable part is connected to the gimbal such that the window can be tilted around the first and/or the second axis with respect to the bottom portion (Col. 3, Lines 8-9, “optical wedges may be formed with respect to all radial directions”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to have the range finder of Svardal in view of Choi further in view of Aschwanden with the wherein the tunable prism comprises a gimbal, wherein the window, the prism-shaping device or the movable part is connected to the gimbal such that the window can be tilted around the first and/or the second axis with respect to the bottom portion as taught by Horiuchi, for the purpose of stabilizing the tunable prism.
Regarding claim 14, modified Svardal teaches as is set forth in claim 12 rejection above but does not specifically disclose wherein the tunable prism comprises four voice coil actuators that are arranged pairwise opposite of each other, wherein the driver circuit comprises a first and a second channel (c1, c2), wherein the voice coil portions comprise double coils, wherein each channel (c1, c2) is configured and connected to one pair of the pairwise arranged voice coil actuators such that the respective channel (c1, c2) can provide the same electric current to the voice coil portions that are arranged opposite of each other, wherein each channel (c1, c2) is connected such to the double coils of the voice coil portion that the generated forces of the two opposite voice coil portions point in opposite directions, when the electric current is provided.
However Aschwanden, in the same field of endeavor because both teach a tunable prism, teaches wherein the tunable prism (Fig. 16, 100) comprises four voice coil actuators (as shown in Fig. 16) that are arranged pairwise opposite of each other (as shown in Fig. 16), wherein the driver circuit comprises a first and a second channel (c1, c2) (Examiner assumes an opposing pair of voice coil actuators are each assigned their own channel of control), wherein the voice coil portions comprise double coils (Fig. 28, 401 and 402), wherein each channel (c1, c2) is configured and connected to one pair of the pairwise arranged voice coil actuators (as shown in Fig. 27) such that the respective channel (c1, c2) can provide the same electric current to the voice coil portions that are arranged opposite of each other (as shown in Fig. 27), wherein each channel (c1, c2) is connected such to the double coils of the voice coil portion that the generated forces of the two opposite voice coil portions point in opposite directions (as shown in upper right hand panel of Fig. 28), when the electric current is provided ([0139], “Thus, when a current is applied to one of the coils 403, a Lorentz force is generated that causes the associated magnet 303 and said coil 403 to attract each other or to repel each other depending on the direction of the current in said coil 403. This allows to tilt the optical … such that light that passes the volume V is deflected as indicated in FIG. 28 in the upper right hand panel”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to have the range finder of Svardal in view of Choi and further in view of Aschwanden and Horiuchi with the wherein the tunable prism comprises four voice coil actuators that are arranged pairwise opposite of each other, wherein the driver circuit comprises a first and a second channel (c1, c2), wherein the voice coil portions comprise double coils, wherein each channel (c1, c2) is configured and connected to one pair of the pairwise arranged voice coil actuators such that the respective channel (c1, c2) can provide the same electric current to the voice coil portions that are arranged opposite of each other, wherein each channel (c1, c2) is connected such to the double coils of the voice coil portion that the generated forces of the two opposite voice coil portions point in opposite directions, when the electric current is provided as taught by Aschwanden, for the purpose of improving control of the image stabilizing device.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW Y LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-3526. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 am - 5:00 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, Pinping Sun can be reached at (571) 270 - 1284. 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.
/MATTHEW Y LEE/Examiner, Art Unit 2872 9 January 2026