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 .
DETAILED ACTION
The instant application having Application No. 18630813 filed on 04/09/2024 is presented for examination by the examiner.
Examiner Notes
Examiner cites particular columns and line numbers in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested that, in preparing responses, the applicant fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner.
Priority
As required by e M.P.E.P. 210, 214.03, acknowledgement is made of applicant’s claim for priority based on application JP 2023-066475, filed 04/14/2023 (Japan).
Receipt is acknowledged of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
However, to overcome a prior art rejection, applicant(s) must submit a translation of the foreign priority papers in order to perfect the claimed foreign priority because said papers has not been made of record in accordance with 37 CFR 1.55. See MPEP § 213.04
Drawings
The applicant’s drawings submitted are acceptable for examination purposes.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 2-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 2 includes the phrase limitation for “the drive member includes …and a rotation member that has a circular shape with an opening …, and wherein the at least part of the lens unit is arranged within the opening of the rotation member”. However, this limitation is confusing because it is unclear how it can be treated, given that the drive member now includes a rotation member that has a circular shape with an opening where at least part of the lens unit is arranged within the opening of the rotation member, but in claim 1 the drive member already has an opening. Hence it is unclear if these two openings are the same or different openings? Moreover, it is unclear as to which opening the at least part of the lens unit needs to be arranged to be within the opening of the rotation member? The above limitation will be treated broadly, such that the opening can be the same or another opening with shape being circular at least in some parts. It is suggested to amend the claim and provide explanations in order to overcome the indefiniteness issues.
Claims 3-9 depend on claim 2 and therefore inherit the same deficiencies.
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 1-4 and 8-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Onaka et al. (hereafter Onaka) US 20200329183 A1.
In regard to independent claim 1, Onaka teaches (see Figs. 1-11D) a lens barrel unit (i.e. as lens barrel 100 of image capturing unit 100 of network camera 1, abstract, paragraphs [05-07, 38-46, 48-59]) comprising:
a lens unit including at least one lens (lens holder 104 with lens 111, paragraphs [40-46, 48-59], Figs. 5-11);
an optical-filter holding member configured to hold an optical filter and insertable into and removable from a light path of the at least one lens (i.e. filter holder 103 with filter 107,106 and insertable in li9ght path of 111, paragraphs [40-46, 48-59], Figs. 5-11); and
a drive member configured to insert or remove the optical-filter holding member into or from the light path (i.e. filter base 102 with actuator 105,gear train 109 and having e.g. parts 1026-28, 1022 configured to guide 103 to glide in Z-direction in/out of light path of 111, paragraphs [44-46, 48-59], Figs. 5-11),
wherein the drive member further is configured to engage with the optical-filter holding member and has an opening penetrating in a direction of an optical axis of the at least one lens (i.e. as 102 engages 103 for guiding in/out of optical path of 111, and 102 has opening in optical axis 11 (X) direction of lens 111, inside e.g. 1027, 1028, paragraphs [44-46, 50-59], Figs.5-6, 9-11) and
wherein at least part of the lens unit is arranged in the opening of the drive member (i.e. as at least end portion of lens unit 104 lens 111 is in the opening of 102, as best depicted in Figs. 8C, 10B-11D, paragraphs [44-46, 50-59]).
Regarding claim 2, Onaka teaches (see Figs. 1-11D) that the drive member (102,105,109) includes a worm coupled to a drive source (i.e. as worm, first part of drive train 109 connected to motor 108, paragraphs [40-43], as depicted in Figs. 4-5, 8-10) and a rotation member that has a circular shape with an opening and includes a worm wheel configured to engage with the worm (i.e. as middle and second gear train circular part 109 inside opening of 102(1027-1028) and engaged with gear meshing portion of 1031, paragraphs [40-43], as depicted in Figs. 4-5, 8-11), and wherein the at least part of the lens unit is arranged within the opening of the rotation member (i.e. as at least end portion of lens unit 104 lens 111 is within the opening of 102, as best depicted in Figs. 8C, 10B-11D, paragraphs [44-46, 50-59]).
Regarding claim 3, Onaka teaches (see Figs. 1-11D) that the worm wheel is provided in a part of an outer peripheral portion of the rotation member (i.e. as second part of 109 engaged with 1031, paragraphs [40-43], as depicted in Figs. 4-5, 8-11).
Regarding claim 4, Onaka teaches (see Figs. 1-11D) that the rotation member includes an engagement portion, and the optical-filter holding member has an engaged portion configured to engage with the engagement portion (i.e. as second part of 109 has portion engaged with engaged part 1031, paragraphs [40-43], as depicted in Figs. 4-5, 8-11).
Regarding claim 8, Onaka teaches (see Figs. 1-11D) that R1 < R3 < R2 is satisfied where an inner diameter of the rotation member is defined as R1, an outer diameter of the rotation member is defined as R2, and a maximum outer diameter of the lens unit is defined as R3 (i.e. as outer diameter larger than middle part diameter of 109 diameter and are larger than minimum outer diameter of 111 of 104, e.g. towards the back end of 111, as depicted in e.g. Figs. 5, 8, 10, paragraphs [40-46, 48-59]).
Regarding claim 9, Onaka teaches (see Figs. 1-11D) that an inner diameter of the rotation member is larger than a minimum outer diameter of the lens unit (i.e. as middle part of 109 diameter is larger than minimum outer diameter of 111 of 104, e.g. towards the back end of 111, as depicted in e.g. Figs. 5, 8, 10, paragraphs [40-46, 48-59]).
Regarding claim 10, Onaka teaches (see Figs. 1-11D) that the optical-filter holding member includes a first optical-filter holding member configured to hold a first optical filter and a second optical-filter holding member configured to hold a second optical filter (i.e. as 103 with portion for holding 107 and second portion for 106, paragraphs [40-46, 48-59], Figs. 5-11), and wherein the first optical-filter holding member and the second optical-filter holding member are configured to be moved on a plane orthogonal to the optical axis of the at least one lens (i.e. as holding portions of 103 with 106, 107 move in Z-Y plane orthogonal to 11 in x direction, paragraphs [40-46, 48-59], Figs. 5-11).
Regarding claim 11, Onaka teaches (see Figs. 1-11D) that the drive member is configured to drive the first optical-filter holding member and the second optical-filter holding member (as 102 with 105, 109 drives 103 with 106, 107, paragraphs [40-46, 48-59], Figs. 5-11) (i) such that the first optical-filter holding member is inserted into the light path, (ii) such that the second optical-filter holding member is inserted into the light path, or (iii) such that none of the first optical-filter holding member and the second optical-filter holding member is inserted into the light path (i.e. as either 106, or 107 is inserted in optical path of 111 or none is inserted e.g. see Figs. 5, 9A-C, 10-11, paragraphs [40-46, 48-59]).
Potentially Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-7 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Fujiwara et al. US 20200329182 A1, and Onaka US 20210141292 A1 also disclose features of instant invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARIN PICHLER whose telephone number is (571)272-4015. 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, Thomas K Pham can be reached at (571)272-3689. 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.
/MARIN PICHLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872