DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
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 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.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 03/04/2024 and 09/25/2025 have been considered by the examiner. The submissions are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of pre-AIA 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) the invention was known or used by others in this country, or patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country, before the invention thereof by the applicant for a patent.
(b) the invention was patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country or in public use or on sale in this country, more than one year prior to the date of application for patent in the United States.
(e) the invention was described in (1) an application for patent, published under section 122(b), by another filed in the United States before the invention by the applicant for patent or (2) a patent granted on an application for patent by another filed in the United States before the invention by the applicant for patent, except that an international application filed under the treaty defined in section 351(a) shall have the effects for purposes of this subsection of an application filed in the United States only if the international application designated the United States and was published under Article 21(2) of such treaty in the English language.
Claims 21 - 34 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(b) as being anticipated by Topliss (US PgPub No. 20100074607).
Regarding claim 21, Topliss teaches a camera (figure 1), including: a lens (figure 1 item 7 with items 8); an image sensor (figure 1 item 4); and an actuator module (figures 2 – 3 and 7; items 30 on an actuator), comprising: a plurality of shape metal alloy (SMA) wires positioned around a periphery of the actuator module (figures 2 – 3 and 7; items 30/31 shape metal alloy (SMA) wires), wherein respective SMA wires of the plurality of SMA wires are configured to be driven with respective electrical currents different from each other to control tilt positioning of the lens relative to the image sensor (paragraphs 0007, 0016 - 0017, 0077, 0080, 0089, 0091, and 0098; shape metal alloy (SMA) wires used to control the lens movement relative to image sensor, via electricity).
Regarding claim 22, as mentioned above in the discussion of claim 21, Topliss teaches all of the limitations of the parent claim. Additionally, Topliss teaches wherein the plurality of SMA wires includes four SMA wires, wherein a first SMA wire of the plurality of SMA wires and a fourth SMA wire of the plurality of SMA wires are positioned in two corners of the actuator module opposite each other with respect to a first axis orthogonal to an optical axis of the lens, and wherein a second SMA wire of the plurality of SMA wires and a third SMA wires of the plurality of SMA wires are positioned in two corners of the actuator module opposite each other with respect to a second axis orthogonal to the optical axis of the lens (figures 2 – 3 and 7; items 30/31; four shape metal alloy (SMA) wires in two corners of the actuator module).
Regarding claim 23, as mentioned above in the discussion of claim 21, Topliss teaches all of the limitations of the parent claim. Additionally, Topliss teaches wherein the plurality of SMA wires suspend the lens over the image sensor (figure 1 item 7 with 8 suspended over item 4 via shape metal alloy (SMA) wires).
Regarding claim 24, as mentioned above in the discussion of claim 21, Topliss teaches all of the limitations of the parent claim. Additionally, Topliss teaches respective biasing springs for the respective SMA wires of the plurality of SMA wires, wherein the respective biasing springs are configured to stretch the respective SMA wires when the respective SMA wires are not receiving an electrical current (figure 12 items 87 and/or figure 13 items 88; return spring/coned-disk spring i.e. biasing springs to stretch the respective SMA wires when the respective SMA wires are not receiving an electrical current).
Regarding claim 25, as mentioned above in the discussion of claim 24, Topliss teaches all of the limitations of the parent claim. Additionally, Topliss teaches wherein the respective biasing springs have a helix shape so that the respective SMA wires extend through the helix shape of the respective biasing springs (figure 12 items 87 and/or figure 13 items 88; return spring/coned-disk spring i.e. biasing springs; note applicant does not define what is meant by helix shape and extend through the helix shape in the specification as filed (in fact the applicant does not even mention helix in the specification as filed), Hence examiner is considering the configuration of Topliss figures 12 and/or 13 as reading on the figure 12 items 87 and/or figure 13 items 88 being a helix shape since they are angled and the SMA wires 60 extend through the helix shape of the respective biasing springs).
Regarding claim 26, as mentioned above in the discussion of claim 21, Topliss teaches all of the limitations of the parent claim. Additionally, Topliss teaches wherein respective SMA wires of the plurality of SMA wires are configured to be driven independently from each other to control the tilt positioning of the lens relative to the image sensor (paragraphs 0007, 0016 - 0017, 0077, 0080, 0089, 0091, and 0098; shape metal alloy (SMA) wires each used to control the lens movement relative to image sensor, via electricity).
Regarding claim 27, as mentioned above in the discussion of claim 21, Topliss teaches all of the limitations of the parent claim. Additionally, Topliss teaches an autofocus coil and a lower spring, wherein the lower spring is electrically connected to the autofocus coil and provides electrical current to the autofocus coil for actuation (paragraphs 0049, 0063, 008, 0086 - 00872; focusing done via item 6 in relation with the SMA wires).
Regarding claim 28, Topliss teaches an actuator module (figures 2 – 3 and 7; items 30 on an actuator), comprising: a plurality of shape metal alloy (SMA) wires positioned around a periphery of the actuator module (figures 2 – 3 and 7; items 30/31 shape metal alloy (SMA) wires), wherein respective SMA wires of the plurality of SMA wires are configured to be driven with respective electrical currents different from each other to control tilt positioning of a lens relative to an image sensor (paragraphs 0007, 0016 - 0017, 0077, 0080, 0089, 0091, and 0098; shape metal alloy (SMA) wires used to control the lens movement relative to image sensor, via electricity; wherein figure 1 item 7 with items 8 is the lens and figure 1 item 4 is the image sensor).
Regarding claim 29, as mentioned above in the discussion of claim 28, Topliss teaches all of the limitations of the parent claim. Additionally, Topliss teaches wherein the plurality of SMA wires includes four SMA wires, wherein a first SMA wire of the plurality of SMA wires and a fourth SMA wire of the plurality of SMA wires are positioned in two corners of the actuator module opposite each other with respect to a first axis orthogonal to an optical axis of the lens, and wherein a second SMA wire of the plurality of SMA wires and a third SMA wires of the plurality of SMA wires are positioned in two corners of the actuator module opposite each other with respect to a second axis orthogonal to the optical axis of the lens (figures 2 – 3 and 7; items 30/31; four shape metal alloy (SMA) wires in two corners of the actuator module).
Regarding claim 30, as mentioned above in the discussion of claim 28, Topliss teaches all of the limitations of the parent claim. Additionally, Topliss teaches wherein the plurality of SMA wires suspend the lens over the image sensor (figure 1 item 7 with 8 suspended over item 4 via shape metal alloy (SMA) wires).
Regarding claim 31, as mentioned above in the discussion of claim 28, Topliss teaches all of the limitations of the parent claim. Additionally, Topliss teaches respective biasing springs for the respective SMA wires of the plurality of SMA wires, wherein the respective biasing springs are configured to stretch the respective SMA wires when the respective SMA wires are not receiving an electrical current (figure 12 items 87 and/or figure 13 items 88; return spring/coned-disk spring i.e. biasing springs to stretch the respective SMA wires when the respective SMA wires are not receiving an electrical current).
Regarding claim 32, as mentioned above in the discussion of claim 28, Topliss teaches all of the limitations of the parent claim. Additionally, Topliss teaches wherein the respective biasing springs have a helix shape so that the respective SMA wires extend through the helix shape of the respective biasing springs (figure 12 items 87 and/or figure 13 items 88; return spring/coned-disk spring i.e. biasing springs; note applicant does not define what is meant by helix shape and extend through the helix shape in the specification as filed (in fact the applicant does not even mention helix in the specification as filed), Hence examiner is considering the configuration of Topliss figures 12 and/or 13 as reading on the figure 12 items 87 and/or figure 13 items 88 being a helix shape since they are angled and the SMA wires 60 extend through the helix shape of the respective biasing springs).
Regarding claim 33, as mentioned above in the discussion of claim 31, Topliss teaches all of the limitations of the parent claim. Additionally, Topliss teaches wherein respective SMA wires of the plurality of SMA wires are configured to be driven independently from each other to control the tilt positioning of the lens relative to the image sensor (paragraphs 0007, 0016 - 0017, 0077, 0080, 0089, 0091, and 0098; shape metal alloy (SMA) wires each used to control the lens movement relative to image sensor, via electricity).
Regarding claim 34, as mentioned above in the discussion of claim 28, Topliss teaches all of the limitations of the parent claim. Additionally, Topliss teaches an autofocus coil and a lower spring, wherein the lower spring is electrically connected to the autofocus coil and provides electrical current to the autofocus coil for actuation (paragraphs 0049, 0063, 008, 0086 - 00872; focusing done via item 6 in relation with the SMA wires).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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:
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 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.
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 35 – 40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Topliss (US PgPub No. 20100074607) in view of Dutta (US PgPub No. 20030076421).
Regarding claim 35, Topliss teaches a device (paragraph 0002; portable electronic device such as a mobile telephone or a mobile digital data processing and/or transmitting device), comprising: a camera (figure 1); and the camera comprising: a lens (figure 1 item 7 with items 8); an image sensor (figure 1 item 4); and an actuator module (figures 2 – 3 and 7; items 30 on an actuator), including: a plurality of shape metal alloy (SMA) wires positioned around a periphery of the actuator module (figures 2 – 3 and 7; items 30/31 shape metal alloy (SMA) wires), wherein respective SMA wires of the plurality of SMA wires are configured to be driven with respective electrical currents different from each other to control tilt positioning of the lens relative to the image sensor (paragraphs 0007, 0016 - 0017, 0077, 0080, 0089, 0091, and 0098; shape metal alloy (SMA) wires used to control the lens movement relative to image sensor, via electricity).
However, Topliss fails to clearly teach wherein the device comprises: a display; one or more processors; and memory storing program instructions executable by the one or more processors to cause images captured by the camera to be displayed on the display. Dutta, on the other hand teaches wherein the device comprises: a display; one or more processors; and memory storing program instructions executable by the one or more processors to cause images captured by the camera to be displayed on the display.
More specifically, Dutta teaches wherein the device (figure 4 item 100) comprises: a display (figure 4 item 104); one or more processors (figure 4 items 410 and 404); and memory storing program instructions executable by the one or more processors to cause images captured by the camera to be displayed on the display (figure 4 item 408; instructions for processing and displaying).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to incorporate the teachings of Dutta with the teachings of Topliss to have a system for displaying images and processing data of the device, thereby improving the functionality and/or usability of Topliss.
Regarding claim 36, as mentioned above in the discussion of claim 35, Topliss in view of Dutta teach all of the limitations of the parent claim. Additionally, Topliss teaches wherein the plurality of SMA wires includes four SMA wires, wherein a first SMA wire of the plurality of SMA wires and a fourth SMA wire of the plurality of SMA wires are positioned in two corners of the actuator module opposite each other with respect to a first axis orthogonal to an optical axis of the lens, and wherein a second SMA wire of the plurality of SMA wires and a third SMA wires of the plurality of SMA wires are positioned in two corners of the actuator module opposite each other with respect to a second axis orthogonal to the optical axis of the lens (figures 2 – 3 and 7; items 30/31; four shape metal alloy (SMA) wires in two corners of the actuator module).
Regarding claim 37, as mentioned above in the discussion of claim 35, Topliss in view of Dutta teach all of the limitations of the parent claim. Additionally, Topliss teaches wherein the plurality of SMA wires suspend the lens over the image sensor (figure 1 item 7 with 8 suspended over item 4 via shape metal alloy (SMA) wires).
Regarding claim 38, as mentioned above in the discussion of claim 35, Topliss in view of Dutta teach all of the limitations of the parent claim. Additionally, Topliss teaches respective biasing springs for the respective SMA wires of the plurality of SMA wires, wherein the respective biasing springs are configured to stretch the respective SMA wires when the respective SMA wires are not receiving an electrical current (figure 12 items 87 and/or figure 13 items 88; return spring/coned-disk spring i.e. biasing springs to stretch the respective SMA wires when the respective SMA wires are not receiving an electrical current).
Regarding claim 39, as mentioned above in the discussion of claim 38, Topliss in view of Dutta teach all of the limitations of the parent claim. Additionally, Topliss teaches wherein the respective biasing springs have a helix shape so that the respective SMA wires extend through the helix shape of the respective biasing springs (figure 12 items 87 and/or figure 13 items 88; return spring/coned-disk spring i.e. biasing springs; note applicant does not define what is meant by helix shape and extend through the helix shape in the specification as filed (in fact the applicant does not even mention helix in the specification as filed), Hence examiner is considering the configuration of Topliss figures 12 and/or 13 as reading on the figure 12 items 87 and/or figure 13 items 88 being a helix shape since they are angled and the SMA wires 60 extend through the helix shape of the respective biasing springs).
Regarding claim 40, as mentioned above in the discussion of claim 35, Topliss in view of Dutta teach all of the limitations of the parent claim. Additionally, Topliss teaches wherein respective SMA wires of the plurality of SMA wires are configured to be driven independently from each other to control the tilt positioning of the lens relative to the image sensor (paragraphs 0007, 0016 - 0017, 0077, 0080, 0089, 0091, and 0098; shape metal alloy (SMA) wires each used to control the lens movement relative to image sensor, via electricity).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Topliss (US patent No. 2013/0002933) teaches a camera system with SMA wires.
Eddington (US patent No. 2015/0135703) teaches a camera system with SMA wires.
HOWARTH (US patent No. 2015/0346507) teaches a camera system with SMA wires.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Usman A Khan whose telephone number is (571)270-1131. The examiner can normally be reached on M - Th 5:30 AM - 2 PM, F 5:30 AM - Noon.
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, Sinh Tran can be reached on (571)272-7564. 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.
Usman Khan
/USMAN A KHAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2637
04/08/2026
Prosecution Insights