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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 4 objected to because of the following informalities: “…the connecting structure of the first movable part.” Appropriate correction is required.
For the purpose of examination this was interpreted as, “the first connecting structure of the first optical element.”
Claim 5 objected to because of the following informalities: “…first connecting portion of the first movable part.” Appropriate correction is required.
For the purpose of examination this was interpreted as, “first connecting portion of the first optical element.”
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1-9, 12, 14-16, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hu (US 20210109307 A1).
Re claim 1, Hu discloses on Fig. 1-2, 4a, and 5a, an optical element drive mechanism (Fig. 2: driving mechanism 1-100), comprising: a first optical element (See Fig. 5a: blades 140a and 140-b of blade assembly 1-40); an immovable part (Fig. 2: fixed portion 1-F); a first movable part (left side components of transmission element 1-50 of movable portion 1-M) [Par 224] connected to the immovable part (See Fig. 1 where transmission element 1-50 is connected to case 1-10 of the fixed part), wherein the first movable part is movable relative to the immovable part (transmission element 1-50 moves relative to fixed portion 1-F) [Par 224]; and a first drive assembly (left side drive assembly 1-D) driving the first movable part to move relative to the immovable part [Par 224]; wherein the immovable part comprises an immovable-part opening (Fig. 2 and 4a: openings 110a, 130a, 160a, 190a) [Par 231] and light enters the immovable-part opening through a main axis (main axis 1-O) [Par 231].
Re Claim 2, Hu discloses, the optical element drive mechanism as claimed in claim 1, and Hu further discloses on Fig. 3, 5A. and 9B, wherein the first optical element (Fig. 5a: blade assembly 1-40) comprises: a first body (Fig. 5a: first blade 1-40a) [Par 237-240]; a first opening (components of aperture 140-E contributed by blade 1-40a) formed on the first body, wherein the first opening has an area (see Fig. 5a), the immovable-part opening has an area (see Fig. 3: unlabeled opening of case 1-10), and the area of the first opening is different from the area of the immovable-part opening (Fig. 3: area of unlabeled 1-40E is smaller than area of unlabeled 1-10a); a first shielding portion (See Fig. 5a: area of blade 140-A between guided opening 1-42a and blade opening 1-41a, the actual body of the blade) located on the first body and close to the first opening (see Fig. 5a); and a first penetrating portion formed on an edge of the first body and close to the first opening (See Fig. 9B: region of aperture 1-40 E adjacent blade 1-40A and 140-D annotated as FP-1, that is covered by blade 140-D as seen in annotated Fig. 9-B).
PNG
media_image1.png
602
838
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Examiner Annotated Fig. 9B of Hu
Re claim 3, Hu discloses, the optical element drive mechanism as claimed in claim 2, and Hu further discloses, on Fig. 3, wherein the area of the first opening is less than the area of the immovable-part opening (Area of the opening of blade 1-40, including blade 1-40a, is less than the opening of case 1-10a) [Par 238-240].
Re Claim 4, Hu discloses, the optical element drive mechanism as claimed in claim 2, and Hu further discloses on Fig. 5a, wherein the immovable part (frame 130) comprises a connecting structure (guiding element 1-34) [Par 238], the first optical element (blade assembly 1-40) further comprises a first connecting portion (guide opening 1-42a) formed close to the edge of the first body (opening 1-42a is on blade 1-40a) and connected to the first connecting portion of the first optical element (guiding element 1-34 is in guide opening 1-42a) [Par 237].
Re Claim 5, Hu discloses, the optical element drive mechanism as claimed in claim 4, and Hu further discloses on Fig. 5a, wherein the connecting structure of the immovable part is a protrusion (guiding element 1-34 is a protrusion) [Par 238], the first connecting portion of the first optical element is a hole (guiding opening 1-42a), and the protrusion and the hole create a close fit (See Fig. 5a where they fit) [Par 238].
Re Claim 6, Hu discloses, the optical element drive mechanism as claimed in claim 2, and Hu further discloses on Fig. 2 and 5a, further comprising: a second optical element (Fig. 5a: blades 1-40D and 1-40C of blade assembly 1-40); a second movable part (Fig. 2: right side components of transmission element 1-50) connected to the second optical element (right side transmission element 1-50 has connection portion 1-53) [Par 237], wherein the second movable part is movable relative to the immovable part (transmission element 1-50 moves relative to fixed portion 1-F) [Par 224]; and a second drive assembly driving the second movable part to move relative to the immovable part (right side driving assembly 1-D) [Par 224]; wherein the second optical element comprises: a second body (blade 1-40D); a second shielding portion (covered area of blade 1-40D around opening 1-42D and aperture 1-40E) located on the second body; and a second penetrating portion (see annotated Fig. 5a above: annotated portion FP-2 ) formed on an edge of the second body.
Re Claim 7, Hu discloses, the optical element drive mechanism as claimed in claim 6, and further discloses on Fig. 5A, wherein the second shielding portion has an area (covered area of blade 1-40-D) [Par 236], the first penetrating portion has an area (area designated FP-1), and the area of the second shielding portion is substantially equal to or slightly greater than the area of the first penetrating portion (See annotated Fig. 5a: covered area of blade 1-40 D can be seen to be larger than area FP-1, as evidenced by area FP-1 appearing to be occluded by blade 1-40D) [Par 236].
Re Claim 8, Hu discloses, the optical element drive mechanism as claimed in claim 6, and Hu further discloses on Fig. 5B, wherein when viewed along a direction that is perpendicular to the main axis (cross sectional z-axis), the first optical element (blade 1-40A and blade 1-40B) and the second optical element (blade 1-40D and blade 1-40C) are located at different heights (Components of each element have blades at different heights, for example 1-40a and 1-40D are at different heights) [Par 243].
Re Claim 9, Hu discloses, the optical element drive mechanism as claimed in claim 6, and Hu further discloses on Fig. 2, 5A, 9B, and 10b, wherein the first movable part (Fig. 2 and 5A: left side components of transmission element 1-50 including bottommost component 1-53) is able to change between a first initial position (Fig. 10B) , a first operation position (Fig. 5A), and a first shielding position (Fig. 9B), the second movable part (Fig. 2 and 5A: right side components of transmission element 1-50 including bottommost component 1-53) is able to change between a second initial position (Fig. 10B), a second shielding position (Fig. 9B), and a second operation position (Fig. 5A), so the first optical element and the second optical element are able to change between an immovable-part-opening-fully-revealed state (Fig. 10B), a first-opening-fully-revealed state (Fig. 5A), and a first-shielding-portion-shielding state (Fig. 9B) [Par 252].
Re Claim 12, Hu discloses, the optical element drive mechanism as claimed in claim 9, and Hu further discloses on Fig. 10B, wherein under the circumstances where the first optical (blades 1-40A and 1-40 B) element and the second optical element (blades 1-40D and 1-40C) are in the immovable-part-opening-fully-revealed state (Fig. 10B), when viewed along the main axis (1-O), the first optical element does not overlap the immovable-part opening, and the second optical element does not overlap the immovable-part opening (See Fig. 10B: all four blades can be seen not overlapping the opening in frame 1-30).
Re Claim 14, Hu discloses, the optical element drive mechanism as claimed in claim 9, and Hu further discloses on Fig. 5A and 9B, wherein under the circumstances where the first optical element (blades 1-40a and 1-40B) and the second optical element (blades 140-C and 1-40D) [Par 236] are in the first-opening-fully-revealed state (See Fig. 5a), when viewed along the main axis (main axis 1-O) [Par 238], the first opening (aperture 1-40E) is fully located in the immovable-part opening (allows ) [Par 236], and the immovable-part opening (In Fig. 5a the opening of frame 1-30 is totally occluded, see Fig. 10B for contrast), the first penetrating portion (FP-1 in annotated Fig. 9B), the second shielding portion at least partially overlap each other (FP-1 is partially covered by the shielding portion of blade 1-40D) [Par 236-238].
Re Claim 15, Hu discloses, the optical element drive mechanism as claimed in claim 9, and Hu further discloses on Fig. 5A and 9B, wherein under the circumstances where the first optical element (blades 1-40a and 1-40B) and the second optical element (blades 140-C and 1-40D)[Par 236-238] are in the first-shielding-portion-shielding state (See Fig. 9B), when viewed along the main axis (1-O), the immovable-part opening (opening of frame 1-30 seen in Fig. 5a), the first shielding portion (Shield portion of blade 1-40A) [Par 236-238], and the second penetrating portion (FP-2 in annotated Fig. 9B) at least partially overlap each other (Annotated Fig. 9B shows that the shield of blade 1-40A overlaps FP-2 which overlaps the opening of frame 1-30 seen in Fig. 5a) [Par 236-238].
Re Claim 16, Hu discloses, the optical element drive mechanism as claimed in claim 9, and Hu further discloses on Fig. 9B, wherein the second optical element (blades 1-40C and 1-40D) further comprises a second opening (portion of aperture 1-40E comprised of blades 1-40C and 1-40D) [Par 252] formed on the second body, the second opening has an area (area of aperture 1-40E occluded by blades 1-40c and 1-40D) [Par 252] , the area of the second opening is different from the area of the immovable-part opening (area of the opening of frame 1-30, seen In Fig. 10B is different), wherein under the circumstances where the first optical element and the second optical element are in the first-shielding-portion-shielding state (Fig. 9B), the second opening is fully located in the immovable-part opening (Fig. 9B shows the aperture area of blades 1-40C and 1-40D inside of the opening of frame 1-30, in contrast to Fig. 10B).
Re claim 19, Hu discloses, the optical element drive mechanism as claimed in claim 16, and Hu further discloses on Fig. 9B, wherein the first optical element (blades 1-40A and 1-40B) further comprises a first avoiding portion (See annotated Fig. 9B: AV-1) avoiding shielding the second opening of the second optical element (aperture 1-40E regions of blades 1-40C and 1-40D), and the second optical element (blades 1-40C and 1-40D) further comprises a second avoiding portion (AV-2) avoiding shielding the first opening of the first optical element (aperture 1-40E regions of blades 1-40C and 1-40D) [Par 252].
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:
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.
Claim(s) 10, 11, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hu.
Re Claim 10, Hu discloses, the optical element drive mechanism as claimed in claim 9.
But Hu does not explicitly disclose, further comprising a control unit, wherein the control unit comprises a database that stores information about the first initial position, the first operation position, the first shielding position, the second initial position, the second shielding position, and the second operation position, after an instruction is received, the control unit outputs a first control signal and a second control signal according to the instruction and the database to control the first drive assembly and the second drive assembly, respectively.
However, Hu teaches in alternative embodiments, on Fig. 15 and 92, that it is desirable to include, a control unit (Fig. 15: control unit 2-CN) [Par 281], wherein the control unit comprises a database that stores information about the first initial position, the first operation position, the first shielding position, the second initial position, the second shielding position, and the second operation position (calibration step stores information in the control assembly about the relationship between the movement of the movable portion relative to the fixed portion and the control signal, this would inherently include all positions of the said portions) [Par 490 and 509], after an instruction is received, the control unit outputs a first control signal (driving signal 8-440) [Par 271 and 489], and a second control signal (Driving signal 8-480) according to the instruction and the database to control the first drive assembly and the second drive assembly, respectively (driving signals go to different drive assemblies) [Par 506].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to modify the system of Hu, in order to provide anti-shake or auto focusing, as taught by [Par 271].
Re Claim 11, Hu discloses, the optical element drive mechanism as claimed in claim 9, and Hu further discloses on Fig. 2, 5A, 9B, and 10b, wherein the first shielding position (Fig. 9B) is located between the first initial position (Fig. 10B) and the first operation position (Fig. 5A) (Fig. 9B shows connecting portion 1-53, and the blade aperture 1-40 between its positions in Fig. 10B and 5A).
But Hu does not disclose, the first shielding position is not located at a center of the first initial position and the first operation position.
However, Hu does explicitly teach the ability to finely control the posture and position of movable parts and their associate optical elements [Par 305], and Hu also explicitly teaches, the use of a stopping assembly to limit the movement of a movable assembly anywhere within a limited range [Par 364], are both known in the art. Thus, it would have been within the ability of one of ordinary skill in the art to simply set a stopping position of the first and second body (aperture blades 1-40a and 1-40D in Fig. 5a, 9B, and 10B) such that it is not located at a center of the first initial position and the first operation position. Further one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so, in order to provide autofocusing or image stabilization [Par 305].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to modify Hu, such that the first shielding position is not located at a center of the first initial position and the first operation position, order to provide autofocusing or image stabilization [Par 305].
Re Claim 13, modified Hu, discloses, the optical element drive mechanism as claimed in claim 9.
But modified Hu does not explicitly disclose, wherein the immovable part comprises a first position-limiting structure, the first optical element further comprises a first slit, under the circumstances where the first optical element and the second optical element are in the immovable-part-opening-fully-revealed state, the first position-limiting structure of the immovable part is in contact with an edge of the first slit of the first optical element.
However, a different embodiment of Hu on Fig. 46 teaches, wherein the immovable part (outer frame 4-304) [Par 365] a first position-limiting structure (stopping element 4-341)[Par 366-368] on an optical element (optical element 4-302)[Par 364-370] further comprises a first slit (stepped structure 4-312) [Par 370], the first position-limiting structure of the immovable part is in contact with an edge of the first slit of the optical element (stopping assembly 4-340 and stopping elements limit the movement of movable assembly 4-MA, and stopping elements provide benefits during contact between moving optical element 4-302 and frame 4-304) [Par 370]. Thus, Hu explicitly teaches, providing a position limiting structure on a moving optical element during its overall contact with an immovable part, is known in the art. Simply arranging for said contact to occur while in the immovable-part-opening-fully-revealed state, would have been within the ability of one of ordinary skill in the art, because said embodiment of Hu already teaches generally arranging device such that the first position-limiting structure of the immovable part is in contact with an edge of the first slit of the first optical element [Par 364-371], for the purpose of avoiding creating unnecessary particles from the collision of the position limiting structure (Stopping element) and the immovable part (Frame) [Par 370].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to further modify Hu such that, wherein the immovable part comprises a first position-limiting structure, the first optical element further comprises a first slit, under the circumstances where the first optical element and the second optical element are in the immovable-part-opening-fully-revealed state, the first position-limiting structure of the immovable part is in contact with an edge of the first slit of the first optical element, in order to avoid creating unnecessary particles from the collision of the position limiting structure (Stopping element) and the immovable part (Frame) [Par 370].
Claim(s) 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hu in view of Yoshizawa (US 20180180971 A1).
Re Claim 17, Hu discloses, the optical element drive mechanism as claimed in claim 16.
But Hu does not explicitly disclose wherein, the immovable-part opening, the first opening, and the second opening are substantially circular.
However, within the same field of endeavor, Yoshizawa teaches, on Fig. 1, that it is desirable in adjustable apertures for the immovable-part opening (opening 4a), the first opening (Fig. 2: aperture A formed by blade group 10), and the second opening (Fig. 2: aperture B formed by blade group 20) are substantially circular [Par 65-8]
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to modify the system of Hu with Yoshizawa in order to provide, light passage openings having different diameters and shapes, as taught by Yoshizawa [Par 7].
Re Claim 18, Hu does not explicitly disclose, the optical element drive mechanism as claimed in claim 16.
But Hu does not explicitly disclose, wherein the area of the second opening is different from the area of the first opening.
However, within the same field of endeavor, Yoshizawa teaches, on Fig. 1-2, that it is desirable in adjustable diaphragms, for the area of the second opening (area of Aperture B of blade group 20) to be different from the area of the first opening (area of aperture A in blade group 10) [Par 65]
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to modify the system of Hu with Yoshizawa in order to provide, size reduction, as taught by Yoshizawa [Par 7].
Claim(s) 20 is under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hu in view of Kihara (US 20050286889 A1).
Re Claim 20, Hu discloses, the optical element drive mechanism as claimed in claim 19.
But Hu does not explicitly disclose wherein a curvature radius of the first avoiding portion is different from a curvature radius of the second avoiding portion.
However, within the same field of endeavor, Kihara teaches, on Fig. 4, that it is desirable in diaphragms for, a curvature radius of the first avoiding portion (see annotated Fig. 4 below for avoiding portion of blade 7, AVK-1, which shows that it would avoid shielding the opening portions of blade 8 as it partially occludes opening 6a, see Fig. 2) [Par 42] is different from a curvature radius of the second avoiding portion (see annotated Fig. 4 below for annotated Fig. 4, AVK-2, which shows that it would avoid shielding the opening portions of blade 7 as it partially occludes opening 6a see Fig. 2, and that the radius of curvature of the portions are different) [Par 42].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to modify the system of Hu with Kihara in order to provide, reduced manufacturing cost, as taught by Kihara [Par 21].
PNG
media_image2.png
748
672
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 4 of Kihara
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Imai (US 20190204713 A1) teaches an adjustable diaphragm.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RAY ALEXANDER DEAN whose telephone number is (571)272-4027. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30-5:00.
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, Bumsuk Won can be reached at (571)-272-2713. 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.
/RAY ALEXANDER DEAN/Examiner, Art Unit 2872
/BUMSUK WON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Prosecution Insights