Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 15, 2026
Application No. 18/672,841

CAMERA MODULE

Final Rejection §102
Filed
May 23, 2024
Priority
May 25, 2023 — JP 2023-086323
Examiner
FOSSELMAN, JOEL W
Art Unit
2639
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Denso Corporation
OA Round
3 (Final)
78%
Grant Probability
Favorable
4-5
OA Rounds
5m
Est. Remaining
92%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 78% — above average
78%
Career Allowance Rate
713 granted / 909 resolved
+16.4% vs TC avg
Moderate +13% lift
Without
With
+13.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
17 currently pending
Career history
919
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.0%
-39.0% vs TC avg
§103
88.8%
+48.8% vs TC avg
§102
7.3%
-32.7% vs TC avg
§112
0.8%
-39.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 909 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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 . Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks pg 6, filed 04/15/26, with respect to claims 11 and 12 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of 03/02/26 has been withdrawn. Claims 11 and 12 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim. The office action does not contain any new rejections and/or arguments. Applicant's arguments filed 12/08/25 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Re claim 1, applicant argues that Mori does not disclose “an assembly of the casing and cover accommodating at least the imaging device and the board" because “the cited reference does not satisfy this enclosure requirement” (Remarks p7). In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., a housing “enclosing” the imaging device and board) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). 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). The claim reads “an assembly of the casing and cover accommodating at least the imaging device and the board”. The term “accommodating” is not limiting to “enclosing”. Given the broadest reasonable interpretation, accommodating means, providing sufficient space . Mori clearly discloses an assembly of the casing and cover accommodating at least the imaging device and the board (figs 3A-4C). Additionally, applicant argues that “mechanical elements 60 and 70” are not “electrical connections” (pgs 7-8). Examiner respectfully disagrees. Mori discloses “an external connector is fitted with the housing 63 of the rear case 60. As a result, the external connector is electrically connected to the rear protrusions 80b of the male contacts 80. In consequence, the image sensor is electrically connected to the external connector” (par [0046]). Therefore, element 60 is conductive via elements 63 and 80, which are illustrated as elements of 60 in figure 2. The electrical connections are further connected to element 70 as described in par [0050]. Finally, applicant argues that Mori does not disclose “this protrusion directly abuts the cover” (Remarks p8). In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., protrusion “directly” abuts) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). 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). Furthermore, as illustrated in figures 3A and 3B, element 92, and/or the circled portion below, read on the claimed protrusion as claimed. PNG media_image1.png 500 744 media_image1.png Greyscale Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action. Claim(s) 1-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Mori et al. (US 2013/0293771, hereinafter Mori). Re claim 1, Mori discloses, a camera module comprising: a lens (40 and/or 21); a holder (50) that accommodates the lens; an imaging device (20) configured to capture an image based on light passing through the lens, and output a signal based on the captured image (par [0035]); a board (30) configured to capture the signal outputted from the imaging device; a casing (70) having electrical conductivity and joined to the holder (figs 4A-4C); a cover (60) having electrical conductivity; and at least one fastening member configured to fasten the casing and the cover to each other, an assembly of the casing and cover accommodating at least the imaging device and the board (figs 3A-4C), the casing including: at least one abutment portion (71 and portion of 70 surrounding 71) arranged to abut onto the cover while the cover is fastened to the casing by the at least one fastening member (91a and 80b); a facing surface that faces the cover (right portion of 30, fig 3A); and at least one protrusion arranged to protrude from the facing surface toward the cover, so that the at least one protrusion abuts onto the cover to ensure electrical connection between the casing and the cover (figs 3A and 3B). Re claim 2, Mori discloses the limitations of claim 1 including wherein: the at least one protrusion has an end that is in contact with the cover (fig 3B); and the end of the at least one protrusion is located on an imaginary stationary plane, the imaginary stationary plane being defined to pass through the at least one abutment portion while being perpendicular to an optical axis of the lens (figs 3A-4C). Re claim 3, Mori discloses the limitations of claim 1 including wherein: the at least one protrusion has an end that is in contact with the cover; and the end of the at least one protrusion is located to be closer to the cover than an imaginary stationary plane is, the imaginary stationary plane being defined to pass through the at least one abutment portion while being perpendicular to an optical axis of the lens (figs 3A-4C). Re claim 4, Mori discloses the limitations of claim 1 including wherein: the at least one protrusion abuts onto the cover so as to be plastically deformed (figs 3A-4C). Re claim 5, Mori discloses, a camera module comprising: a lens (40 and/or 21); a holder (50) that accommodates the lens; an imaging device (20) configured to capture an image based on light passing through the lens, and output a signal based on the captured image (par [0035]); a board (30) configured to capture the signal outputted from the imaging device; a casing (60) having electrical conductivity and joined to the holder (figs 4A-4C); a cover (70) having electrical conductivity; and at least one fastening member configured to fasten the casing and the cover to each other, an assembly of the casing and cover accommodating at least the imaging device and the board (figs 3A-4C), the cover including: at least one abutment portion (71 and portion of 70 surrounding 71) arranged to abut onto the cover while the cover is fastened to the casing by the at least one fastening member (91a and 80b); a facing surface that faces the casing (right portion of 30, fig 3A); and at least one protrusion arranged to protrude from the facing surface toward the casing, so that the at least one protrusion abuts onto the cover to ensure electrical connection between the casing and the cover (figs 3A and 3B). Claims 6-8 are rejected for the reasons stated in claims 2-4, respectively. The module as claimed would have been anticipated by the module of Mori. Re claim 9, Mori discloses the limitations of claim 1 including wherein: the cover has opposing first and second major surfaces; the first major surface faces the facing surface of the casing; the cover has at least one recess formed on at least one corner thereof so as to be recessed into the at least one corner; the at least one fastening member is mounted through the at least one recessed corner of the cover; and a part of the at least one fastening member is held in the at least one recess (figs 3A-4C, recess containing 91 and 92). Re claim 10, Mori discloses the limitations of claim 5 including wherein: the cover has opposing first and second major surfaces; the first major surface faces the facing surface of the casing; the cover has at least one recess formed on at least one corner thereof so as to be recessed into the at least one corner; the at least one fastening member is mounted through the at least one recessed corner of the cover; and a part of the at least one fastening member is held in the at least one recess (figs 3A-4C, recess containing 91 and 92). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 11 and 12 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. Re claim 11, Mori fails to disclose “wherein: the at least one protrusion is integrally formed with the casing, and the casing and the cover electrically connected to each other through the at least one protrusion define a shielded housing that encloses the imaging device and the board”. Claim 12 recites similarly allowed limitations. 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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. Contact Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOEL W FOSSELMAN whose telephone number is (571)270-3728. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 - 5:00 M-F. 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, Twyler Haskins can be reached at (571)272-7406. 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. /JOEL W FOSSELMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2639
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 23, 2024
Application Filed
Sep 18, 2025
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102
Dec 08, 2025
Response Filed
Mar 02, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §102
Apr 15, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Apr 23, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12669438
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR IMAGING SAMPLES
2y 7m to grant Granted Jun 30, 2026
Patent 12666130
INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS AND INFORMATION PROCESSING METHOD
2y 7m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Patent 12666167
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR MULTISPECTRAL EXTRACTION FROM CROSSTALK PROFILE
2y 3m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Patent 12666135
IMAGE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM, IMAGE CAPTURING DEVICE, IMAGING PROCESSING METHOD, AND NON-TRANSITORY COMPUTER-EXECUTABLE MEDIUM
1y 11m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Patent 12666168
SOLID-STATE IMAGING DEVICE AND METHOD OF OUTPUTTING IMAGING DATA
1y 11m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

4-5
Expected OA Rounds
78%
Grant Probability
92%
With Interview (+13.4%)
2y 7m (~5m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 909 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month