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 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) 1-4 and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Katagishi, et al. (JP 2005099084).
Regarding claim 1, Katagishi discloses “a barrel (Fig. 1, ref.# 200) detachably coupled to a camera (Fig. 1, ref.# 100); a focusing lens (Fig. 1, ref.# 11); a driving unit (Fig. 1, ref.# 1) moving the focusing lens by generating a driving force with power supplied from the camera; an input button (Fig. 1, ref.# 6, 9) receiving a user command; and a control device (Fig. 1, ref.# 10) controlling the driving unit to move the focusing lens to a preset custom focus position when a custom focus adjustment command is input through the input button (page 6 of translation; paragraphs 1-4: “operation button 9 when it is necessary to return the focus lens to the position preset”).”
Regarding claim 2, Katagishi discloses “wherein an operation mode of the control device (Fig. 1, ref.# 10) comprises a custom mode and a non-custom mode (page 5 to translation, last paragraph: autofocus & manual focus), and the control device controls the driving unit to move the focusing lens to the custom focus position when the custom focus adjustment command is input after the operation mode is switched to the custom mode (page 6 of translation; paragraphs 1-4: “operation button 9 when it is necessary to return the focus lens to the position preset”).”
Regarding claim 3, Katagishi discloses “wherein the control device switches the operation mode to the custom mode when detecting the selection of the input button while receiving initial power from the camera.” (page 10 of translation, last paragraph )
Regarding claim 4, Katagishi discloses “wherein the control device switches the operation mode to the non-custom mode when not detecting the selection of the input button while receiving initial power from the camera.” (page 10 of translation, last paragraph )
Regarding claim 6, Katagishi discloses “wherein an operation mode of the control device comprises a custom mode and a non-custom mode (page 5 to translation, last paragraph: autofocus & manual focus), and the control device stores a current position of the focusing lens as the custom focus position when a custom focus storage command is input after the operation mode is switched to the custom mode (page 6 of translation, paragraphs 1-3).”
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) 5 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Katagishi, et al. (JP 2005099084) in view of Yoshimi (JP 2010191585).
Regarding 5 and 7, Katagishi teaches all the structure set forth in the claims except (Claim 5) “wherein the custom focus adjustment command comprises selecting the input button for a preset threshold range of time” and (Claim 7) “wherein the custom focus storage command comprises selecting the input button for more than a preset threshold time.” Katagishi teaches multiple buttons for different operations. However, it was well known in the art prior to the effective fling date of the claimed invention to use a single button on a camera system that operates distinct function based on the time the button is selected as taught by Yoshimi (See page 2 of translation: Background Art, 2nd paragraph: “operation button for a long time”, “operation button for a short time”). Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Katagishi such that “wherein the custom focus adjustment command comprises selecting the input button for a preset threshold range of time” and “wherein the custom focus storage command comprises selecting the input button for more than a preset threshold time” in order to reduce the number of operational control buttons to allow for ease of operation by reducing the number of input buttons.
Claim(s) 8 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Katagishi, et al. (JP 2005099084) in view of Kawamura, et al. (JP H11202400).
Regarding claim 8 and 9, Katagishi discloses all the structure set forth in the claims except for (Claim 8) “an output unit which outputs the operation mode of the control device” and (Claim 9) “wherein the output unit outputs light of different colors in the custom mode and the non-custom mode.” However, the use of a two different colors to indicated between autofocus and manual focus on a camera lens was well known in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention as taught by Kawamura (See translation, 5th paragraph: indicating by colors autofocus and manual focus). Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Katagishi to include “an output unit which outputs the operation mode of the control device”, “wherein the output unit outputs light of different colors in the custom mode and the non-custom mode” in order to allow the user to quickly and definitely determine if the lens is set for an autofocus or a manual focus mode.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Takahara, et al. (JP 2020095275), Nakada (CN 102998877), Japanese reference JP 4590891) and Jakahara (US 2007/0285556) teach a camera lens system that utilizes a preset focus position control.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RODNEY FULLER whose telephone number is (571)272-2118. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 am - 4:30 pm, Monday - Friday.
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, Stephanie Bloss can be reached at 571-272-3555. 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.
/RODNEY E FULLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2852
January 29, 2026