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 Amendment
The amendment filed on 12/30/2025 traverses the objections to the specification and drawings and these objections and these objections are withdrawn.
The amendment filed on 12/30/2025 also traverses the 112 rejections which are withdrawn.
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.
Claims 1 and 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by “Miyazaki” (US 2003/0057426).
Regarding claim 1, Miyazaki anticipates 1. An optical package, comprising: a Printed Circuit Board (PCB) comprising a plurality of cut-out sections (Fig. 1, [0052]; the wiring board 4 has four circular holes 41a-d);
a lens, comprising a first plurality of protrusions corresponding respectively to the plurality of cut-out sections (Fig. 1, [0049], [0052]; the lens unit 3 comprises the pins 33a and 33c and the screws 42 corresponding to the respective circular holes 41a-d),
wherein the first plurality of protrusions comprises three protrusions being guide posts (Fig. 1, [0049], [0052]; the pins 33a and 33c and the screws 42 are positioning elements),
a first protrusion of the first plurality of protrusions is formed on a right hand side of the lens, and a second protrusion of the first plurality of protrusions is formed on a left hand side of the lens opposite to the right hand side (Fig. 1, [0049], [0052]; the pin 33c and the right screw 43 is on the right hand side of the lens, and the pin 33a and the left screw 43 are formed on opposite left hand side of the lens unit 3),
and when the lens is placed under the PCB, the first plurality of protrusions will pass through the cut-out sections (Fig. 1, [0049], [0052]; when the lens unit 3 is placed under the wiring board 4, the pins 33a, 33c and screws 43 pass through the respective circular holes 41a-d);
and a sensor for attaching on to the lens and the PCB (Fig. 1, [0043]; when the sensor 2 is for attaching the lens unit 3 to the wiring board 4).
Regarding claim 5, Miyazaki anticipates 5. The optical package of claim 1, wherein the guide posts are guide posts with ribs (Fig. 1, [0049], [0052]; the screws 42 are threaded).
Regarding claim 6, Miyazaki anticipates 6. The optical package of claim 1, wherein the lens further comprises a first feature and the sensor has a protrusion, wherein the first feature is designed to correspond to the protrusion for fixing the lens to the sensor (Figs. 1, 3A-B, [0044], [0049], [0070]; the lens unit 3 comprises the cylindrical-shaped pins 33a,c and the imaging device 2 has brim-like edges which are projected from two opposite sides of the package 22, wherein the cylindrical-shaped pins 33a,c correspond to the brim-like edges to correspond to the cylindrical-shaped pins 33a,c for fixing the lens unit 3 to the imaging device 2).
Regarding claim 7, Miyazaki anticipates 7. The optical package of claim 6, wherein the first feature is cylindrical and corresponds to a shape of the lens (Figs. 1, 3A-B, [0044], [0049], [0070]; the lens unit 3 comprises the cylindrical-shaped pins 33a,c are positioned on the opposite diagonal of the shape of the lens unit 3).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Miyazaki in view of “Ding” (US 2016/0268693).
Regarding claim 2, Miyazaki discloses the claimed invention as applied to claim 1, above.
Miyazaki does not disclose the limitations of claim 2.
Ding discloses the guide posts are heat staked to the PCB (Fig. 1, [0056]; the posts 110 are heat staked to the PCB 104).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have constructed Miyazaki’s optical package with Ding’s heat staked posts in order so that the PCB can be held tightly and permanently, as suggested by Ding at [0056].
Claims 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Miyazaki in view of “Jiangxi Suichuan” (CN 205430768).
Regarding claim 3, Miyazaki discloses the claimed invention as applied to claim 1, above.
Miyazaki does not disclose the limitations of claim 3.
Jiangxi Suichuan discloses the guide posts are glued to the PCB (Fig. 1, claim 2, page 2, bottom; the upright post or column is connected through epoxy resin glue and the circuit board).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have constructed Miyazaki’s optical package with Jiangxi Suichuan’s epoxy glue in order to provide reinforcement to strengthen the bore periphery which prevents the wiring board from damage, as suggested by Jiangxi Suichuan at page 2, bottom.
Regarding claim 4, Miyazaki in view of Jiangxi Suichuan discloses the claimed invention as applied to claim 3, above.
Miyazaki does not disclose the limitations of claim 4.
Jiangxi Suichuan discloses the guide posts are glued to the PCB using an epoxy (Fig. 1, claim 2, page 2, bottom; the upright post or column is connected through epoxy resin glue and the circuit board).
Claims 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Miyazaki in view of “Skeren” (WO 2022/053512).
Regarding claim 15, Miyazaki discloses 15. An optical package, comprising: a Printed Circuit Board (PCB) comprising a plurality of cut-out sections (Fig. 1, [0052]; the wiring board 4 has four circular holes 41a-d);
a lens, comprising a first plurality of protrusions corresponding respectively to the plurality of cut-out sections (Fig. 1, [0049], [0052]; the lens unit 3 comprises the pins 33a and 33c and the screws 42 corresponding to the respective circular holes 41a-d),
a first protrusion of the first plurality of protrusions is formed on a first side of the lens, and a second protrusion of the first plurality of protrusions is formed on a second side of the lens opposite to the first side (Fig. 1, [0049], [0052]; the pin 33a and the left screw 43, and the pin 33c and the right screw 43 are formed on opposite sides of the lens unit 3),
and when the lens is placed under the PCB, the first plurality of protrusions will pass through the cut-out sections (Fig. 1, [0049], [0052]; when the lens unit 3 is placed under the wiring board 4, the pins 33a, 33c and screws 43 pass through the respective circular holes 41a-d);
and a sensor for attaching on to the lens and the PCB (Fig. 1, [0043]; when the sensor 2 is for attaching the lens unit 3 to the wiring board 4);
wherein the protrusions which attach to the top of the PCB (Fig. 1, [0049], [0052]; the pins 33a and 33c and the screws 42 attach to the top of the wiring board 4).
Miyazaki does not disclose the protrusions being snap features, wherein the snap features comprise outward-facing protrusions.
Skeren discloses the protrusions being snap features, wherein the snap features comprise outward-facing protrusions (Fig. 5, Abstract, page 25, lines 17-32; the attachment means 65 are snap-fit outwardly facing protrusions).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have constructed Miyazaki’s optical package with Skeren’s snap features so that the light collector element can be united with the circuit- or wiring board through inter-engagement of the respective pairs of inter-engagement elements, as suggested by Skeren at page 25, lines 30-32.
Regarding claim 16, Miyazaki in view of Skeren discloses the claimed invention as applied to claim 15, above.
Miyazaki discloses 16. The optical package of claim 15, wherein the lens further comprises a first feature and the sensor has a protrusion, wherein the first feature is designed to correspond to the protrusion for fixing the lens to the sensor (Figs. 1, 3A-B, [0044], [0049], [0070]; the lens unit 3 comprises the cylindrical-shaped pins 33a,c and the imaging device 2 has brim-like edges which are projected from two opposite sides of the package 22, wherein the cylindrical-shaped pins 33a,c correspond to the brim-like edges to correspond to the cylindrical-shaped pins 33a,c for fixing the lens unit 3 to the imaging device 2).
Regarding claim 17, Miyazaki in view of Skeren discloses the claimed invention as applied to claim 16, above.
Miyazaki discloses 17. The optical package of claim 16, wherein the first feature is cylindrical and corresponds to a shape of the lens (Figs. 1, 3A-B, [0044], [0049], [0070]; the lens unit 3 comprises the cylindrical-shaped pins 33a,c are positioned on the opposite diagonal of the shape of the lens unit 3).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 STANLEY TSO whose telephone number is (571)270-0723. The examiner can normally be reached Tu-Thurs 6am-6pm, alt M 6am-2pm.
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, Tim Thompson can be reached at 571-272-2342. 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.
/STANLEY TSO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2847