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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 4/22/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-6, 8, 10-14, and 18-20 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Takizawa et al. (Pub. No. US 2010/0202766 A1; hereafter Takizawa) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious in view of Takizawa.
Applicant correctly points out that while Takizawa states that each pair of magnets on a rotation axis are symmetrically disposed, Takizawa does not explicitly state that magnets on different axes of rotation are symmetrically placed. Therefore, Takizawa does not fully anticipate the newly added claim limitations “wherein a distance from a center of the first rotation axis to the first magnet part, a distance from the center of the first rotation axis to the second magnet part, and a distance from the center of the first rotation axis to the third magnet part are the same” as called for in claim 1.
However, Takizawa does later disclose that the “panning driving section, the tilting driving section and the rolling driving section can be provided on a circumference of a circle centered around the optical axis, and thus the magnetic gaps formed of the magnets and the magnetic yokes of the driving sections can be set to have the same length. This can increase the density of each magnetic flux, and also improve and uniformize the driving efficiency in the panning, tilting and rolling directions” (see Takizawa paragraph [0253], emphasis added).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed that the magnets of Takizawa could be placed on a circle (which necessarily are all the same distance from the center) in order to achieve the disclosed benefits of “improv[ing] and uniformiz[ing] the driving efficiency in the panning, tilting and rolling directions” as taught by Takizawa.
The remainder of Applicant’s arguments rest on the perceived deficiency of Takizawa, addressed above, and therefore are similarly addressed.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1, 4, 6-8, 10, 13, and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takizawa et al. (Pub. No. US 2010/0202766 A1; hereafter Takizawa).
Regarding claim 1, Takizawa discloses a lens driving device comprising: a first housing (see Takizawa Fig. 18, items 101 and 102); a lens assembly disposed in the first housing (see Takizawa Fig. 12, item 100); a first driving part disposed in the first housing and configured to drive the lens assembly (see Takizawa Fig. 12, items 401-405); a second housing disposed to surround the first housing (see Takizawa Fig. 12, items 200 and 210), and a second driving part disposed in the second housing and corresponding to the first driving part (see Takizawa Fig. 12, items 301-303); wherein the first driving part includes a plurality of first driving members configured to drive the lens assembly based on each of a plurality of rotation axes (see Takizawa Fig. 12, items 401, 402, and 405, rotation axes 20-22), wherein the plurality of first driving members includes a first magnet part configured to move the lens assembly based on a first rotation axis, a second magnet part configured to move the lens assembly based on a second rotation axis different from the first rotation axis, and a third magnet part configured to move the lens assembly based on a third rotation axis different from the first and second rotation axes, and wherein a distance from a center of the first rotation axis to the first magnet part, a distance from the center of the first rotation axis to the second magnet part, and a distance from the center of the first rotation axis to the third magnet part are the same. (see Takizawa paragraphs [0213], [0216], and [0253] which disclose that the magnets are “located symmetrically… with respect to the sphere center 202A” and that “panning driving section, the tilting driving section and the rolling driving section can be provided on a circumference of a circle centered around the optical axis.” It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed that the magnets of Takizawa could be placed on a circle in order to achieve the disclosed benefits of “improv[ing] and uniformiz[ing] the driving efficiency in the panning, tilting and rolling directions” as taught by Takizawa. See also Response to Arguments, above.).
Regarding claim 4, Takizawa discloses the lens driving device of claim 3, wherein the centers of the first to third rotation axes are the same (see Takizawa Fig. 12, note the axes all intersect at the sphere center).
Regarding claim 5, Takizawa discloses the lens driving device of claim 2, wherein a distance from the center of the rotation axis to the third magnet part is same as at least one of a distance from the center of the rotation axis to the first magnet part and a distance from the center of the rotation axis to the second magnet part (see Takizawa Fig. 12, they are all symmetrically placed about the center).
Regarding claim 6, Takizawa discloses the lens driving device of claim 5, wherein the third rotation axis corresponds to an optical axis through which light is incident on the lens assembly (see Takizawa Fig. 12, items 10 and 22).
Regarding claim 7, Takizawa discloses the lens driving device of claim 1, but does not specifically disclose that sizes of the first to third magnet parts are the same.
The magnets shown in the drawings have essentially the same dimensions, but Takizawa never explicitly states that they are the same size, and drawings cannot be relied upon as accurate evidence of object dimensions.
However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide the magnets as magnets having the same size as the most straightforward interpretation of the Takizawa reference, since Takizawa does not discuss giving the magnets different sizes. Additionally, it would make the assembly of the device simpler if the magnets were uniform components that could be placed in any of the holders, as opposed to having to fashion distinct magnet sizes for each location.
Regarding claim 8, Takizawa discloses the lens driving device of claim 1, wherein the plurality of second driving members include: a first coil part corresponding to the first magnet part (see Takizawa Fig. 12, item 301); a second coil part corresponding to the second magnet part (see Takizawa Fig. 12, item 302); and a third coil part corresponding to the third magnet part (see Takizawa Fig. 12, item 303).
Regarding claim 10, Takizawa discloses the lens driving device of claim 1, wherein the first magnet part includes a plurality of first magnets facing each other in a first horizontal direction (see Takizawa Fig. 12, items 401), wherein the second magnet part includes a plurality of second magnets facing each other in a second horizontal direction perpendicular to the first horizontal direction (see Takizawa Fig. 12, items 402), and wherein the third magnet part includes a plurality of third magnets facing each other in a diagonal direction between the first horizontal direction and the second horizontal direction (see Takizawa Fig. 12, items 405).
Regarding claim 13, Takizawa discloses the lens driving device of claim 10, wherein a first distance between the plurality of first magnets passing through the center of the first housing, a second distance between the plurality of second magnets passing through the center of the first housing, and a third distance between the plurality of third magnets passing through the center of the first housing are the same (see Takizawa paragraphs [0213], [0216], and [0253] and Response to Arguments, above.).
Regarding claim 18, Takizawa discloses a lens driving device comprising: a first housing having a first receiving space; a lens assembly disposed in the first receiving space of the first housing (see Takizawa Fig. 12, item 100); a second housing having a second receiving space in which the first housing is disposed (see Takizawa Fig. 12, items 200 and 210); and a driving part configured to move the first housing including the lens assembly relative to the second housing, wherein the driving part includes: a first driving part configured to drive the first housing based on a first rotation axis (see Takizawa Fig. 12, items 301 and 401); a second driving part configured to drive the first housing based on a second rotation axis different from the first rotation axis (see Takizawa Fig. 12, items 302 and 402); and a third driving part configured to drive the first housing based on a third rotation axis different from the first and second rotation axes (see Takizawa Fig. 12, items 303 and 4050), wherein the plurality of first driving members includes a first magnet part configured to move the lens assembly based on a first rotation axis, a second magnet part configured to move the lens assembly based on a second rotation axis different from the first rotation axis, and a third magnet part configured to move the lens assembly based on a third rotation axis different from the first and second rotation axes (see Takizawa Fig. 12, items 401, 402, and 405), and wherein a distance from a center of the first rotation axis to the first magnet part, a distance from the center of the first rotation axis to the second magnet part, and a distance from the center of the first rotation axis to the third magnet part are the same (see Takizawa paragraphs [0213], [0216], and [0253] which disclose that the magnets are “located symmetrically… with respect to the sphere center 202A” and that “panning driving section, the tilting driving section and the rolling driving section can be provided on a circumference of a circle centered around the optical axis.” It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed that the magnets of Takizawa could be placed on a circle in order to achieve the disclosed benefits of “improv[ing] and uniformiz[ing] the driving efficiency in the panning, tilting and rolling directions” as taught by Takizawa. See also Response to Arguments, above.).
Claim(s) 9, 15, and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takizawa in view of Chiang (Pub. No. US 2010/0098394 A1; hereafter Chiang).
Regarding claim 9, Takizawa discloses the lens driving device of claim , but does not specifically disclose that the lens assembly includes: a bobbin; and a lens disposed in the bobbin; wherein the second driving part includes a fourth coil part disposed in the bobbin and corresponding to the first magnet part and the second magnet part.
Chiang discloses a lens assembly that includes: a bobbin (see Chiang Fig. 2 item 32); and a lens disposed in the bobbin (see Chiang Fig. 2, items 31 and 32 and paragraph [0022] “A lens or a lens module (not shown) can be received in the core member 31”); wherein the second driving part includes a fourth coil part disposed in the bobbin (see Chiang Fig. 2, item 38) and corresponding to the first magnet part and the second magnet part (see Chiang Fig. 2 which show that the focus coil 38 utilizes the same magnets as the image stabilization magnets 35).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide the device of Takizawa with a bobbin and coil like that in Chaing in order to enable the lens device to conduct focusing operations.
Regarding claim 15, Takizawa discloses a lens driving device comprising: a housing (see Takizawa Fig. 12, items 200 and 210); and a driving part disposed in the housing and configured to drive the lens, wherein the driving part includes a plurality of magnet parts, wherein the plurality of magnet parts include: a plurality of first magnets arranged to face each other in a first horizontal direction with respect to a center of the housing; a plurality of second magnets arranged to face each other in a second horizontal direction perpendicular to the first horizontal direction with respect to the center of the housing; and a plurality of third magnets arranged to face each other in a diagonal direction between the first and second horizontal directions with respect to the center of the housing (see Takizawa Fig. 12, items 401, 402, and 405), and wherein a first distance between the plurality of first magnets passing through the center of the housing, a second distance between the plurality of second magnets passing through the center of the housing, and a third distance between the plurality of third magnets passing through the center of the housing are the same, and wherein distances from the center of the housing to the plurality of first magnets, distances from the center of the housing to the plurality of second magnets, and distances from the center of the housing to the plurality of third magnets are the same (see Takizawa paragraphs [0213], [0216], and [0253] which disclose that the magnets are “located symmetrically… with respect to the sphere center 202A” and that “panning driving section, the tilting driving section and the rolling driving section can be provided on a circumference of a circle centered around the optical axis.” It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed that the magnets of Takizawa could be placed on a circle in order to achieve the disclosed benefits of “improv[ing] and uniformiz[ing] the driving efficiency in the panning, tilting and rolling directions” as taught by Takizawa. See also Response to Arguments, above.).
Takizawa does not specifically disclose a bobbin disposed in the housing; and a lens disposed in the bobbin.
Chiang discloses a bobbin (see Chiang Fig. 2 item 32); and a lens disposed in the bobbin (see Chiang Fig. 2, items 31 and 32 and paragraph [0022] “A lens or a lens module (not shown) can be received in the core member 31”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide the device of Takizawa with a bobbin and coil like that in Chaing in order to enable the lens device to conduct focusing operations.
Regarding claim 17, Takizawa as modified discloses the lens driving device of claim 15, wherein the plurality of first magnets are a yaw driving part configured to yaw the lens, wherein the plurality of second magnets are a pitch driving part configured to pitch the lens, and wherein the plurality of third magnets are a roll driving part configured to roll the lens (see Takizawa Fig. 12, axes 20-22).
Finality
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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NOAM S REISNER whose telephone number is (571)270-7542. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00AM-5:30PM.
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, STEPHANIE BLOSS can be reached at 571-272-3555. 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.
/NOAM REISNER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2852 9/8/2026
Prosecution Insights