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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kitai (US Patent 3,762,295).
With regard to claims 1 and 8: Kitai disclose an electronic apparatus with an attachment portion (a camera body 2 with mount 1) and an accessory which is attached to and detachable from the attachment portion (the accessory is a lens unit 5 which is able to be attached to and detached from the mount, see column 2 lines 20-28). The electronic apparatus includes a holder (arrangement of angularly disposed flanges 4) which acts as an attachment portion configured to engage with an engagement portion on the accessory (corresponding angularly disposed flanges 7 of the lens mounting ring plate 6) to hold the accessory in a case where the accessory disposed at a first portion relative to the holder (the first position is the rotational position in which the bayonet flanges 7 of the lens unit align with the spaces between the flanges 4 of the camera mount such that the lens unit can be inserted into the holder of the camera or removed therefrom, noted in column 2 lines 21-24 and column 3 lines 24-25) is rotated to a second position in a first direction (by rotation of the lens unit from the first position to the point at which a rotation stop is engaged to secure the flanges 7 of the lens unit behind the flanges 4 of the holder to secure the lens in position as noted in column 3 lines 26-31). The accessory includes a plurality of contacts 11 which are arranged in the first direction to correspond to a plurality of terminals 9 arranged on the electronic apparatus (the camera mount is shown in Figure 2 with one of four terminals 9 labeled and because the description indicates that there terminals are brought into electrical contact with the lens contacts, see column 2 line 60 through column 3 line 16 the lens contacts are disclosed as having corresponding positions on the lens unit mounting ring).
While Kitai does not explicitly disclose the exact angle between the contacts/terminals or the exact angle of the rotation required to move from the first position to the second position, the drawings and disclosure of Kitai implicitly disclose that the angle between the contacts is greater than the rotation angle due to the inferences which one skilled in the art would reasonably be expected to draw from the specification and drawings of Kitai (see MPEP 2144.01), as follows. The figures and disclosure of Kitai include four terminals/contacts (see Figures 2 and 3) which appear to arranged roughly equally around the circumference of the mounting interface (seen in Figure 2), which would lead said person to infer an angular interval of roughly 90°. The bayonet mount of the camera body is shown in Figure 2 as having three flanges and three openings (meaning that the lens mount must have a corresponding number of openings and flanges to allow for insertion and engagement), which would cause said person to infer that the rotation angle between the first position and the second position is 60° or less as rotation beyond 60° would cause one or more flanges of the lens mount to begin to disengage from the corresponding flange of the camera mount and would not longer be “in angular correspondence” as required by Kitai in column 3 lines 24-28.
Claims 1-2, 5, 8-9, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Houir Alami (US Patent 11,489,297 B2).
With regard to claims 1 and 8: Houir Alami discloses an electronic apparatus (socket 10A, which can be reasonably considered to an electronic apparatus as it is intended to control the transmission of electricity via action of a switching arrangement) which comprises an attachment portion (socket-outlet 10) attachable to and detachable from an accessory (the accessory being plug 50A which is attachable to the socket as shown in Figure 2 and detachable therefrom as shown in Figure 1); a holder (grooves 12D) which is configured to engage with an engagement portion of the accessory (pins 56B) in a case where the accessory is disposed at a first position relative to the attachment portion (the plug is positioned against the socket with pins 56B inserted into the vertical portions of the grooves, a configuration shown in Figure 6A) is rotated to a second portion (rotated around the X axis to the position shown in Figure 8A). Houir Alami discloses that the electronic apparatus includes a plurality of terminals (14B and central grounding terminal 18C, see column 10 line 52 through column 11 line 5 and column 14 lines 50-67) arranged in the first direction and connectable to corresponding contacts (54 and 52) of the accessory. The terminals of the electronic apparatus and contacts of the accessory are arranged with an angular separation which is greater than the rotational angle of the accessory from the first position to the second position (see column 12 lines 1-10, the rotational angle between the first and second position is disclosed as being 50° while the angular separation of the terminals and contacts is 60°).
With regard to claims 2 and 9: Houir Alami includes a plurality of electrical contact and terminal pairs (combinations of 54 and 14B, note that in this rejection of claims 2 and 8 the central portion 52 and 18C does not correspond to any of the first, second, or third contacts/terminals) which are connectable to each other. The structure of the contacts is such that they would be capable of carrying electrical power, ground, or certain signals when attached to respective sources of power, ground, and signal, and since the claims are written indicate that the terminals and contacts in terms of intended use (“for grounding”, “for power supply”, and “for signal transmission” without claiming the inclusion of a connected power supply, a connected ground, or a connected signal-generating source), this is sufficient the meet the claimed structure regarding the first through third terminals/contacts. The accessory and electronic apparatus are configured such that at the first position each of the first, second, and third contacts are not connected to corresponding terminals (due to element 14 being in a retracted state, spacing the terminals 14B away from the contacts, a state called the “insulated position” in Houir Alami) and in a case where the accessory is rotated from the first position to the second position the first, second, and third contacts are simultaneously connected to the first, second, and third terminals (because element 14 controls the movement of each of the terminals 14B simultaneously due to the terminals being supported by element 14 and cased to move simultaneously from the insulated position to the contacting position to the as noted in column 15 line 62 through column 16 line 15).
With regard to claims 5 and 11: Houir Alami includes a plurality of electrical contact and terminal pairs (combinations of 54 and 14B and 52 and 18C note that in this rejection of claims 5 and 11 the central portion 52 and 18C is corresponds to the ”first terminal” and “first contact” used for grounding) which are connectable to each other. The first terminal and contact (52 and 18C) are disclosed as being used for grounding and are arranged at the arrangement center of the plurality of terminals (see column 14 lines 30-31 and column 14 lines 50-61). The structure of the other contact/terminal pairs (six sets of contact/terminal pairs 54/14B are present) are each such that they would be capable of carrying electrical power or certain signals when attached to respective sources of power or signal, and since the claims are written indicate that the terminals and contacts in terms of intended use (“for power supply” and “for signal transmission” without claiming the inclusion of a connected power supply or a connected signal-generating source), this is sufficient the meet the claimed structure regarding the second and third terminals/contacts. The accessory and electronic apparatus are configured such that at the first position the first terminal is connected to the first contact and each of the second and third contacts are not connected to corresponding terminals (due to element 14 being in a retracted state, spacing the terminals 14B away from the contacts, a state called the “insulated position” in Houir Alami, see column 15 lines 33-43) and in a case where the accessory is rotated from the first position to the second position the second and third contacts are connected to the second and third terminals (because element 14 controls the movement of each of the terminals 14B simultaneously due to the terminals being supported by element 14 and cased to move simultaneously from the insulated position to the contacting position to the as noted in column 15 line 62 through column 16 line 15).
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.
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.
Claims 3-4 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kitai in view of Ogura et al (US Patent 4,739,356).
With regard to claims 3 and 10: While the terminals and contacts of Kitai are such that no terminals are connected to corresponding contacts in the first position, the disclosure of Kitai, being from the early 1970s, largely predates the use of integrated digital control systems within camera lenses and thus does not include contacts/terminals for power supply, ground, and signal transmission (instead the connections are two power supply connections to a pair of electromagnets and a pair of sensing connections for detecting when switches indicating the status of the shutter opening are triggered). Additionally Kitai does not disclose that any of the terminal/contact pairs are caused to come into contact before the other terminals as is claimed.
Due to rapid advancements in integrated electronics in the 1970s and 1980s (and continuing to the effective filing date), use of lenses which include integrated control circuitry has become commonplace in the photographic arts, as discussed by Ogura column 1 lines 10-33. As noted in column 1 lines 25-33 this results in the need for at least three connections between the lens and the camera body: power, data, and ground. Ogura in column 2 line 44 through column 3 line 56 indicates that equipping a lens unit and camera combination with four electrical connections (power, data, “Busy”, and ground, with ground having two terminals on the camera body which land on the same contact of the lens unit) and equipping the lens unit with a microcontroller communication with the camera body allows for numerous operations and additional functionality, including exchange of lens data (F-number) to the camera body, allowing the lens to implement its own focusing and diaphragm drive control, and indicating when the lens is ready to begin photographic capture. Ogura further teaches that in order to prevent damage to the circuitry in the lens and the camera due to the transistors in each entering a latch-up state, the connection points should be arranged on the mount such that connections are made in the order of ground first, signal second, and power last (see column 5 lines 1-30).
A person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have found it obvious to have converted the lens and camera system of Kitai to a more advanced microprocessor-controlled system as taught by Ogura in order to take advantage of the additional capabilities which microprocessor lens control offers, switching the four terminals of the lens/camera connection to power, data, “busy”, and ground as used in Ogura. Said person would have further found it obvious to have adjusted the positioning of the terminals/contacts such that during the mounting operation ground is connected first, signal lines (data and “Busy”) second, and power supply last in order to prevent the occurrence of a latch-up state.
With regard to claim 4: Ogura teaches that the attachment order can be easily assured by configuring the contacts to have decreasing lengths in order of connection (ground longer than signal and signal longer than power), see abstract and column 4 line 55 through column 5 line 30. Said person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to use this structure to ensure order of connection in the combination as Ogura indicates the structure ensures the correct order of connection.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6-7 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
With regard to claim 6: The prior art of record, alone or in combination, does not disclose nor indicates that a person having ordinary skill in the art before the time of filing would have found obvious the combination of the limitations of claim 5 with the additional limitations added in claim 6. The prior art which is applicable to claim 5 is applicable because claim 5 does not include any particular unique structure which results in physical differences between the signal contact and the power contact, making it possible to reasonably apply connection structures with a plurality of identical conductive elements such as that of Houir Alami. The addition of the requirement that the third contact be longer than the second contact in the first (rotational) direction makes such prior art no longer anticipatory, and the prior art does not include teachings which indicate that it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify such structures to meet the claimed limitations.
With regard to claim 7: The prior art does not teach the inclusion of a dial member into an accessory which includes the claimed structure of claim 1. Camera lenses do frequently include ring-shaped operation members (see for example Kawai US Patent 11,212,430 B2 element 375), but these are not “dials” as the term would be reasonably understood by a person having skill in the art in light of the disclosure. Additionally of note is that by requiring that the signal transmission contact carry the outputs of the dial member the claim language eliminates the possibility to apply as anticipatory prior art which only discloses generic connection terminals (as in the rejections over Houir Alami above).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Chen (US Patent 6,893,297 B2) discloses an electronic device (a power adapter) with an attachable accessory (plug adapter).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Leon W Rhodes Jr whose telephone number is (571)270-5774. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00AM - 6:00PM.
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, Walter Lindsay can be reached at (571) 272-1674. 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.
/LEON W RHODES, JR/Examiner, Art Unit 2852