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 .
Status
The filing on 06/09/2026 amended claims 1, 3, 4, 7, 8, 12, 14, 17, 18, and cancelled claims 2 and 13. Claims 1, 3-12, and 14-20 are pending and rejected.
Objection/s to the Application, Drawings and Claims
The filing on 06/09/2026 appropriately amended the title; hence the objections to the title made in the last office action are withdrawn.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 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.
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.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 3, 7-9, 11, 13, 17, 18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Li (US 20220091362 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Li teaches a projection device (40), comprising: an optical engine module (44), configured to provide an image beam; a projection lens module (46), disposed on a transmission path of the image beam and configured to project the image beam out of the projection device (40); a sensor (42), configured to obtain position information of the projection device (40); a driving member (43; [0057]), coupled to the projection lens module (46); a storage medium (420), configured to store a lookup table (first, second, and/or third correspondence table); and at least one processor (401), coupled to the sensor (42), the storage medium and the driving member (43), wherein the at least one processor (401) is configured obtain a moving range of the projection lens module corresponding to the position information by looking up the lookup table (first, second, and/or third correspondence table) according to the position information, wherein the moving range comprises a range for the projection lens module to move; to generate a first moving signal according to a minimum value of the moving range ([0067], [0068], [0078], [0087], [0095]); and transmit the first moving signal to the driving member (43), and the driving member (43) is configured to control the projection lens module (46) to move relative to the projection device (40) according to the first moving signal ([0057], [0067]-[0071]).
Regarding claim 12, Li teaches a control method of a projection device (40), wherein the projection device (40) comprises a sensor (42), a driving member (43), a storage medium (402), at least one processor (401), and a projection lens module (46) configured to project an image beam, and the control method comprises: obtaining position information of the projection device (40) by the sensor (42); obtaining a moving range of the projection lens module, by the at least one processor, corresponding to the position information and a lookup table (first, second, and/or third correspondence table) stored in the storage medium wherein the moving range comprises a range for the projection lens module to move; generating a first moving signal by the at least one processor (401) according to a minimum value of the moving range; and according to the first moving signal, controlling the projection lens module (46) by the driving member (43) to move relative to the projection device (40; ([0067], [0068], [0078], [0087], [0095]).
Regarding claim 3, Li further teaches the minimum value of the moving range corresponds to a minimum projection size of an image projected by the projection device (40), and a maximum value of the moving range corresponds to a maximum projection size of the image projected by the projection device (40; [0067], [0068], [0078], [0087], [0095]).
Regarding claims 7 and 17, Li further teaches the at least one processor (401) is configured to: determine whether the storage medium (402) stores a mapping relationship between the position information and a second moving signal ([0062]); and in response to determining that the storage medium (402) does not store the mapping relationship, obtain the moving range of the projection lens module (46) according to the position information and the lookup table (first, second, and/or third correspondence table; [0069]-[0071], [0100], [0107]).
Regarding claims 8 and 18, Li further teaches wherein the at least one processor (401) is configured to generate the first moving signal by the at least one processor according to the minimum value of the moving range by determine whether the storage medium (402) stores a mapping relationship between the position information and the first moving signal; and in response to determining the storage medium (402) stores the mapping relationship, generate the first moving signal according to the mapping relationship ([0065]-[0068], [0071], [0076]-[0099]).
Regarding claim 9, Li further teaches the sensor (42) comprises a time of flight sensor ([0055]), and the position information comprises a distance between the projection device (40) and a projection target ([0065]).
Regarding claims 11 and 20, Li further teaches inherently, a housing (i.e., lens barrel), wherein the projection lens module (46) is embedded in the housing, and when the projection lens module (46) moves, the projection lens module (46) protrudes from the housing (i.e., to telescope, [0057]).
Claim Rejections - AIA 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 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.
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.
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 of this title, 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 4-6 and 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li in view of Matsuno (US 20160044289 A1).
Regarding claims 4 and 14, Li does not explicitly teach an input device, coupled to the at least one processor (401), wherein the at least one processor (401) is configured to receive an user command through the input device and generate a second moving signal according to the user command and the moving range, wherein the at least one processor (401) is configured to transmit the second moving signal to the driving member (43), and the driving member (43) is configured to control the projection lens module (46) to move relative to the projection device (40) according to the second moving signal.
Matsuno teaches an input device (4), coupled to the at least one processor (10), wherein the at least one processor (10) is configured to receive an user command through the input device (4) and generate a second moving signal according to the user command and the moving range, wherein the at least one processor (10) is configured to transmit the second moving signal to the driving member (MPU+motor), and the driving member (MPU+motor) is configured to control the projection lens module (19) to move relative to the projection device (1) according to the second moving signal (Fig. 6; [0043], [0053], [0054], [0061], [0064]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skills in the art at the time of the invention to combine Li with Matsuno; because it allows user to control the size of the projection image.
Regarding claims 5 and 15, the combination of Li and Matsuno consequently results in the at least one processor (10 of Matsuno) is configured to project an on-screen display menu (64 of Matsuno) having a range of the projection size corresponding to the moving range through the projection lens module (19 of Matsuno), and the at least one processor (10 of Matsuno) is configured to receive the user command in response to projecting the on-screen display menu (Fig. 6; [0043], [0053], [0054], [0061], [0064] of Matsuno).
Regarding claims 6 and 16, the combination of Li and Matsuno consequently results in the at least one processor (10 of Matsuno) is configured to record a mapping relationship between the position information and the second moving signal in the storage medium (16; Fig. 1, 6; [0052]-[0054] of Matsuno).
Claims 10 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li in view of Ichieda (US 20210109428 A1).
Regarding claims 10 and 19, Li further teaches in response to the change of the position information, the at least one processor (401) generates a second moving signal according to the changed position information and transmits the second moving signal to the driving member (43), and the driving member (43) controls the projection lens module (46) to move relative to the projection device (40) according to the second moving signal ([0065]-[0068]).
Li does not explicitly teach the at least one processor (401) is configured to periodically detect whether the position information changes.
Ichieda teaches to periodically detect whether the position information changes ([0149]; Fig. 22).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skills in the art at the time of the invention to combine Li with Ichieda; because it ensures the changes in position is detected so that the correction can be applied timely.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments with respect to claims 1 and 12 have been fully considered but are found not persuasive; hence the rejection/s of all pending claims are maintained.
Regarding claims 1 and 12, applicant/s argue,
On page 4, of the Office Action, the Office stated that paragraphs [0067]-[0068], [0078], [0087] and [0095] of Li teach the claim interpretation of originally filed claim 2, which is now incorporated into claim l. Specifically, the Office appears to equate Li's "optical zooming range [DO, Dl]" with the claimed "moving range," and asserts that Li generates a moving signal according to a minimum value (e.g., DO) of this range.
Referring to paragraphs [0065]-[0068] and [0071] of Li, Li discloses an algorithm designed specifically to maintain a constant width of a projection picture regardless of changes in the projection distance. To achieve this, after acquiring the current projection distance (Dt), Li's processor calculates a target position for the lens based on a pre-established correspondence table or mathematical relationship, and drives the lens to move exactly to that target position. Li's primary purpose is clearly stated in paragraph [0067] of Li: “by adjusting the position of the lens, such that the projection picture is maintained at the width W during the process of projection”.
The minimum focal length and minimum adjustable projection distance (DO) in Li merely serve as static boundary conditions that define the overall optical zooming range of the projector. Li does not query a lookup table to extract a range of allowable lens movements for a given distance, nor does Li use these boundary values to generate a movement command.
In contrast, claim 1 defines that the processor "obtain a moving range of the projection lens module corresponding to the position information by looking up the lookup table" and further defines the "moving range comprises a range for the projection lens module to move" (e.g., providing a spectrum of available lens positions, such as 100 mm to 120 mm, for a single piece of position information, such as a projection distance of 40 cm, see paragraphs [0028]- [0032] of the as-filed specification). Furthermore, claim 1 recites that the processor "generate a first moving signal according to a minimum value of the moving range" (e.g., selecting the 100 mm minimum value to establish a baseline minimum projection size) and "transmit the first moving signal to the driving member", whereby the driving member controls the movement of the projection lens module according to this first moving signal.
Because Li only calculates a fixed position to maintain a predetermined image size, Li neither teaches obtaining a "moving range" containing a plurality of positions for a single piece of position information, nor does Li teach generating a moving signal according to a "minimum value" of the moving range…
Examiner respectfully disagrees. Whether Li “only calculates a fixed position to maintain a predetermined image size” is irrelevant. The claim does not exclude “calculating a fixed position to maintain a predetermined image size.” The issue is whether Li teaches “obtain a moving range of the projection lens module corresponding to the position information by looking up the lookup table according to the position information, wherein the moving range comprises a range for the projection lens module to move; to generate a first moving signal according to a minimum value of the moving range; and transmit the first moving signal to the driving member.” First, the claims do not limit the position information to any particular type of position information, e.g., position of the lens element within the projection lens or position of the projection lens in relation to the screen, etc… Second, the claims do not limit moving range to dynamic, static or otherwise. Furthermore, there is nothing in the claim language that requires the above claim limitation to interpreted as “’moving range’ containing a plurality of positions for a single piece of position information.” Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
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 extension fee 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 BAO-LUAN Q LE whose telephone number is (571)270-5362. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday; 9:00AM-5:00PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Minh-Toan Ton can be reached on (571) 272 230303. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
Any response to this action should be mailed to:
Commissioner for Patents
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
Or faxed to:
(571) 273-8300, (for formal communications intended for entry)
Or:
(571) 273-7490, (for informal or draft communications, please label “PROPOSED” or “DRAFT”)
Hand-delivered responses should be brought to:
Customer Service Window
Randolph Building
401 Dulany Street
Alexandria, VA 22314
/BAO-LUAN Q LE/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2882
Prosecution Insights