CTFR 18/586,581 CTFR 98868 Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia 1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Acknowledgements 2. Applicant’s arguments, filed on 02/02/2026, are acknowledged. Amended claim 1 is acknowledged. Response to Arguments 3. Applicant’s arguments, see PG. 6, filed 02/02/2026, with respect to the rejection of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. 102(1)(1) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground of rejection is made in view of Yazawa (US 2013/0194442 A1). Applicant argues/remarks (pg. 6): 4. Tanaka fails to disclose that springs 24a, 24b, and 24c are not disposed on the rear surface of the imaging element 20. Response to argument/remark: 5. Tanaka does fail to teach that the biasing springs 24a, 24b, and 24c are disposed on a rear surface of the imaging element 20. However, Yazawa teaches a digital camera 10 with camera shake correction apparatus 20. As such [0068-0069] teaches mounting holes 50 and 51 to accommodate an X and Y direction drive coils on stage plate 40, as viewed in Fig. 2. Further, [0062] teaches three rotatable balls B positioned in front of the stage plate 40 in the Z direction on a front yoke 21 (Fig. 2 for reference). In addition three balls are also positioned in support recesses 34 of a rear yoke 22; wherein these are positioned at the rear of the stage plate 40 in the Z-direction. These ball elements are viewed as biasing the stage plate 40 so to move relative to the front and rear yokes. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the biasing balls as taught by Yazawa can be used in a similar structure of a camera shake correction unit as taught by Tanaka, so to provide shake correction movements for an imaging unit. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 6. 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA 7. Claim s 1-2 and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanaka (US 2020/0329200 A1) in view of Yazawa (US 2013/0194442 A1) . 8. Regarding claim 1, a shake correction device (…Tanaka, in [0023] and [0106], teaches an image shake correction device…) that drives an imaging element ( …[0041] teaches imaging element 20 that is driven by drive unit 105…) by an actuator to perform shake correction (…wherein [0106] teaches that an X-axis, Y-axis drive VCMs, and a rotation drive VCM constitute a drive unit…) , the shake correction device comprising: a fixed unit (…wherein [0065] teaches support member 1; Fig. 4…) that includes a first fixing member (…wherein [0079] teaches support member 1A) provided with a magnet and a yoke of the actuator (…as taught in [0081] support member drive magnets and yokes are arranged on the surface on element 1A; Fig. 4…) ; a movable unit (…wherein [0060] teaches movable member 2; Fig. 2, 5…) that includes a holding frame holding the imaging element (…wherein [0095-96], with respect to figures 5 and 6, teach a base 22 onto which the imaging element is arranged…) and a coil of the actuator (…wherein [0097-0100] teach different drive coils arranged on base 22…) and is configured to move within a plane intersecting an optical axis (…wherein [0045] teaches a mechanism of image shake correction by moving the imaging element perpendicular to an optical axis…) ; and a biasing unit (119, Fig. 5) that biases the movable unit toward the first fixing member by point contact along an optical axis direction (…wherein [0069] teaches that the movable member 2 is biased against the support member by elastic members; because the relationship of the movable member and the support member can be defined to be in a direction that matches the optical axis, as depicted in Fig. 3, it may be said that the biasing is in an optical axis direction…) , wherein the actuator is disposed on a rear surface of the imaging element (…as evidenced in Fig. 3, the light receiving surface 20a is clear to receive incoming light; Fig. 4 further depicts the actuating components on a surface which interfaces with a rear surface of the imaging element…) . Tanaka doesn’t further teach the biasing unit disposed on a rear surface of the imaging element (however, Yazawa teaches a digital camera 10 with camera shake correction apparatus 20. As such [0068-0069] teaches mounting holes 50 and 51 to accommodate an X and Y direction drive coils on stage plate 40, as viewed in Fig. 2. Further, [0062] teaches three rotatable balls B positioned in front of the stage plate 40 in the Z direction on a front yoke 21 (Fig. 2 for reference). In addition three balls are also positioned in support recesses 34 of a rear yoke 22; wherein these are positioned at the rear of the stage plate 40 in the Z-direction. These ball elements are viewed as biasing the stage plate 40 so to move relative to the front and rear yokes. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the biasing balls as taught by Yazawa can be used in a similar structure of a camera shake correction unit as taught by Tanaka, so to provide shake correction movements for an imaging unit…) . 9. Regarding claim 2, Tanaka in view of Yazawa teaches the shake correction device according to claim 1 (see claim 1 above), wherein the imaging element and the actuator are provided in a positional relationship in which a projection region of the imaging element in a thickness direction and at least a part of the actuator overlap with each other (…wherein Tanaka, in [0077], teaches projection portions 17a-c extending from a base 10 to a lens 101; thus as viewed with respect to figures 4 and 5, imaging element 20 with respect to components of the driving mechanism overlap with the projection portions 17a-c in a thickness direction Z…) . 10. Regarding claim 13, Tanaka in view of Yazawa teaches the shake correction device according to claim 1(see claim 1 above), wherein the actuator is a voice coil motor (…wherein Tanaka in [0100] teaches a voice coil motor with reference to figures 5 and 6…) . 11. Regarding claim 14, Tanaka in view of Yazawa teaches an imaging apparatus comprising: the shake correction device according to claim 1 (see claim 1 above) (…wherein Tanaka in [0020] teaches an imaging device comprising the image shake correction device…) . 07-21-aia AIA 12. Claim s 3-4, 6, and 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanaka US (2020/0329200 A1) in view of Yazawa (US 2013/0194442 A1) and further view of Awazu et al. (US 2022/0006958 A1; further referred to as Awazu). 13. Regarding claim 3, Tanaka in view of Yazawa teaches the shake correction device according to claim 1 (see claim 1 above). Though Tanaka teaches a circuit board 21 at the side of the base 22 (as depicted in Fig. 5; Tanaka doesn’t specify a first flexible circuit connected to the actuator (…however, Awazu, in [0052], teaches a first flexible printed circuit board (FPC) at an end point of a coil C1…) and a second flexible circuit connected to the imaging element are attached to a side surface of the holding frame (…wherein [0071] teaches a second FPC fixed to an imaging element holding member. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that a flexible printed circuit board as taught by Awazu could have been implemented in the teaching of Tanaka, thus providing flexible tolerance for the circuit board which is part of a movable mechanism…) . 14. Regarding claim 4, Tanaka in view of Yazawa and further view of Awazu teaches the shake correction device according to claim 3 (see claim 3 above), wherein the holding frame includes at least a first side surface and a second side surface intersecting the first side surface (…wherein Tanaka, in [0095], teaches base 22 (part of member 2) is c-shaped and includes several surfaces where on several drive coils (C1, C2, and C3) are formed (as depicted in figures 5 and 6…) , and the first flexible circuit is attached to the first side surface, and the second flexible circuit is attached to the second side surface (…wherein Tanaka, in [0061], teaches circuit board 21 to be fixed on C1, C2, and C3; Awazu further teaches a first and second flexible printed circuit boards. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that a flexible printed circuit board as taught by Awazu could have been implemented in the teaching of Tanaka, thus providing flexible tolerance for the circuit board which is part of a movable mechanism…) . 15. Regarding claim 6, Tanaka in view of Yazawa and further view of Awazu teaches the shake correction device according to claim 3 (see claim 3 above), further comprising: a controller that inputs a drive signal for suppressing resonance of the movable unit to the actuator (…wherein Tanaka, in [0052], teaches a system controller 108 for controlling the shake correction mechanism and correcting image shake by moving the light receiving surface; [0064] teaches that the controller 108 detects a position of the movable member 2 and corrects the image shake…) . 16. Regarding claim 9, Tanaka in view of Yazawa teaches the shake correction device according to claim 1 (see claim 1 above). Tanaka doesn’t further specify the biasing unit includes a ball plunger (…however, Awazu, in [0044], teaches a holding member 132 sandwiched in the Z direction (see Fig. 7) by two fixing members and balls disposed between the two fixing members and the holding member; thus the image holding member is movable in the X and Y direction. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that ball bearings, as such taught by Awazu, could have been implemented in the biasing process as taught by Tanaka, thus to have proper support and free movement without friction in the process of image shake correction which depends on adjusting a movable element…) . 17. Regarding claim 10, Tanaka in view of Yazawa teaches the shake correction device according to claim 1 (see claim 1 above), further comprising: a hall sensor that detects a position of the imaging element (…wherein Tanaka, in [0062], teaches hall elements 1-3 for detecting a position of member 2 (whereon the imaging element is mounted thereon)…) , wherein the magnet of the actuator is used as a magnet that generates a magnetic field detected by the hall sensor (…wherein Tanaka, in [0087-89], teaches detection magnets Mh1-3 which face respective hall elements H1-3 detection elements for position detection; [0107-0109] further teach how the hall element uses the magnet for position detection…) . Tanaka doesn’t further teach wherein a hall element constituting the hall sensor is disposed inside the coil of the actuator (…however, Awazu, in [0054], teaches a hall element H1 arranged in the hollow portion of a coil C1; wherein the hall element detects a magnetic field from a first magnet. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that hall elements can be placed at a position as such taught by Awazu, whereby this would be beneficial so to make smaller components which do not rely on additional space to place the hall sensors…) . 07-21-aia AIA 18. Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanaka (US 2020/0329200 A1) in view of Yazawa (US 2013/0194442 A1) and Awazu et al. (US 2022/0006958 A1; further referred to as Awazu) and further view of Sasaki et al. (US 2010/0277604 A1; further referred to as Sasaki) . 19. Regarding claim 5, Tanaka in view of Yazawa and Awazu teach the shake correction device according to claim 3 (see claim 3 above). The combined reference doesn’t further teach wherein at least one of the first flexible circuit or the second flexible circuit is attached while having a bent portion, and the bent portion changes following movement of the holding frame (…however, Sasaki teaches a flexible PWB102 which has bending areas in the form of its installation, as taught in [0102-0103]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that a flexible circuit board, as taught by Tanaka in view of Awazu, could have been installed in a manner as taught by Sasaki, so to allow for a more fitting circuit board which may be bent to install and also have the flexibility to accommodate additional deformations due to movement of component(s) whereon the flexible board is installed…) . 07-21-aia AIA 20. Claim s 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanaka US (2020/0329200 A1) in view of Yazawa (US 2013/0194442 A1) and Awazu et al. (US 2022/0006958 A1; further referred to as Awazu) and further view of Sugaya (JP2016173517A). 21. Regarding claim 7, Tanaka in view of Yazawa and Awazu teaches the shake correction device according to claim 6 (see claim 6 above). The combined reference does not teach the shake correction device further comprising: a temperature acquisition unit that acquires an environmental temperature, wherein the drive signal is input to the actuator based on the environmental temperature acquired by the temperature acquisition unit (…however, Sugaya ,in [0026], teaches a posture detection unit which performs an inverse temperature correction using a temperature correction coefficient relative to a movement control amount; wherein this may correspond to temperature characteristics of at least a coil and a magnet and the temperature characteristics of a member supporting the movable member; [0027] further teaches that the correction coefficient is calculated based on measurements under different arbitrary temperatures wherein the correction value at current environmental temperature relative to a reference temperature is the temperature correction and wherein the correction value at reference temperature relative to a current environmental temperature is referred to as the inverse temperature correction. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that an image shake correction using correction coefficients could have been implemented in the shake correction device as taught by Tanaka in view Awazu, thus that accuracy of posture detection is not reduced depending on the environmental temperature as taught by Sugaya…) . 22. Regarding claim 8, Tanaka in view of Yazawa and Awazu and further view of Sugaya teaches the shake correction device according to claim 7 (see claim 7 above), wherein the controller selects the drive signal from among a plurality of the drive signals based on the environmental temperature and inputs the selected drive signal to the actuator (…wherein Sugaya, in[0027], teaches that the correction coefficient is calculated based on measurements under different arbitrary temperatures wherein the correction value at current environmental temperature relative to a reference temperature is the temperature correction and wherein the correction value at reference temperature relative to a current environmental temperature is referred to as the inverse temperature correction. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that an image shake correction using correction coefficients could have been implemented in the shake correction device as taught by Tanaka in view Awazu, thus that accuracy of posture detection is not reduced depending on the environmental temperature as taught by Sugaya…) . 07-21-aia AIA 23. Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanaka US (2020/0329200 A1) in view of Yazawa (US 2013/0194442 A1) and Awazu et al. (US 2022/0006958 A1; further referred to as Awazu) and further view of Okamura et al. (US 2014/0293073 A1; further referred to as Okamura). 24. Regarding claim 11, Tanaka in view of Yazawa and Awazu the shake correction device according to claim 10 (see claim 10 above), wherein the magnet of the actuator is a magnet portion composed of a pair of magnets disposed at a first gap on the yoke (….wherein Tanaka, in [0083], teaches magnet mv 1 is fixed on a front surface of the yoke18 of the second support member 1B at a position facing the X- axis rotation drive magnet Mv1 (yoke 14) of the first support member 1A…) . The combined references do not further teach wherein opposing corner portions of distal end portions of the pair of magnets are cut, and a second gap between the distal end portions is wider than the first gap (…however, Okamura teaches an image shake correction apparatus with a driving mechanism comprising magnet groups with respect to coil groups , as taught in [0048-49] and [0059] in accordance with Fig. 1, wherein it is taught that in the Y-direction magnet portion 22 is shorter than a first magnet 21, as is magnet 24 shorter than 23; wherein coils 41 and 42 correspond to function together with magnet group to make a moving body 31 move in a particular direction. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the magnets can be arranged in this configuration whereby it is possible to avoid interference between a moving body and a magnet…) . 07-21-aia AIA 25. Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanaka US (2020/0329200 A1) in view of Yazawa (US 2013/0194442 A1) and Awazu et al. (US 2022/0006958 A1; further referred to as Awazu) and further view of Taguchi (JP2020170963A). 26. Regarding claim 12, Tanaka in view of Yazawa teaches the shake correction device according to claim 1 (see claim 1 above). Tanaka does not further specify to teach wherein an electromagnetic wave shielding member is disposed between a rear surface side of the imaging element and the coil (…however, Taguchi teaches a similar blur correction device with a shield member which is used to magnetically isolate electromagnetic waves generated from a voice coil motor, as mentioned in [0003]; shield members 56a-c are taught in [0026]; wherein [0040] teaches that the shield members are arranged between a movable frame 51 and coils 53a-c; further [0048] teaches that imaging element 6 is arranged on the movable frame. As illustrated in Fig. 5, the shield layers are arranged between the imaging element and the coils. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that electromagnetic waves can be shielded in an imaging apparatus, as taught by Taguchi, so to isolate noise that is common to coils which are used as part of a motor used in image shake correction…) . Conclusion 07-40 AIA 27. 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 SURAFEL YILMAKASSAYE whose telephone number is (703)756-1910. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30am-5:00pm. 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, TWYLER HASKINS can be reached at (703)272-7406. 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. /SURAFEL YILMAKASSAYE/Examiner, Art Unit 2639 /TWYLER L HASKINS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2639 Application/Control Number: 18/586,581 Page 2 Art Unit: 2639 Application/Control Number: 18/586,581 Page 3 Art Unit: 2639 Application/Control Number: 18/586,581 Page 4 Art Unit: 2639 Application/Control Number: 18/586,581 Page 5 Art Unit: 2639 Application/Control Number: 18/586,581 Page 6 Art Unit: 2639 Application/Control Number: 18/586,581 Page 7 Art Unit: 2639 Application/Control Number: 18/586,581 Page 8 Art Unit: 2639 Application/Control Number: 18/586,581 Page 9 Art Unit: 2639 Application/Control Number: 18/586,581 Page 10 Art Unit: 2639 Application/Control Number: 18/586,581 Page 11 Art Unit: 2639 Application/Control Number: 18/586,581 Page 12 Art Unit: 2639 Application/Control Number: 18/586,581 Page 13 Art Unit: 2639 Application/Control Number: 18/586,581 Page 14 Art Unit: 2639
Prosecution Insights