DETAILED ACTION
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) filed on 03/05/2024 and 07/18/2025 is/are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97 and is/are being considered by the Examiner.
Claim Objections
The claims are objected to because of the following informalities:
1. A typo (underlined) in Claim 4: “…a protrusion which is provided at at least one of an outer edge or an inner edge of the first frame body and a tip of which is exposed from the first resin body…”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the weld of a resin forming the first resin body is formed in a portion that is different from a portion of the first frame body that is connected to the first torsion bar. must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1 and 10 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over Claims 1-7 of copending Application No. 18/687,241 of Kuroki (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because each of the elements of Claims 1 and 10 of the present application is met by corresponding Claims 1 & 4-7 of the copending application (see table of correlation below).
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented (as of 03/30/2026).
Claim Number of Present Application
Claim Element of Present Application
Corresponding Claim Language of U.S. Patent Application No. 18/687,241 of Kuroki
1
An optical scanning device comprising: a movable reflector; a first frame body made of metal that is located in at least a part of a region surrounding the movable reflector; a first torsion bar made of metal that is connected to the movable reflector and the first frame body; and a first resin body provided over at least a part of the first frame body.
Claims 1 & 4-6 recite:
An optical scanning device comprising: a movable reflector (claim 1); further comprising a torsion bar connected to the movable reflector (claim 4); further comprising a frame body that is located in at least a part of a region surrounding the movable reflector and connected to the torsion bar (claim 5); wherein a resin body is provided over at least a part of the frame body (claim 6);
10
A sensor device comprising: the optical scanning device according to claim 1, a light-emitting element; and a light detection element that detects light emitted from the light-emitting element, reflected by the movable reflector, and reflected or scattered by an object that exists outside of the optical scanning device.
Claims 1 & 4-7 recite:
A sensor device comprising: the optical scanning device according to claim 1 (claim 7); a first light-emitting element (claim 1); and a first light detection element detecting light emitted from the first light-emitting element (claim 1) reflected by the movable reflector, and reflected or scattered by an object that exists outside of the optical scanning device (claim 7);
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.
Claims 3 and 6-7 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.
1. Claim 3 recites the limitation: “wherein a distance between both portions of the first frame body opposing to each other in a direction parallel to a rotation axis of the first frame body decreases in at least a part of the first frame body as going away from the rotation axis”. It is unclear where the ‘portions’ of the frame body are located since the recited ‘rotation axis’ of the first frame body has no specified location, thereby resulting in an unclear multiplicity of positional relationships between the various portions of the first frame body with respect to the rotational axis. Furthermore, it is unclear which part of the first frame body is being referred to in the limitation “in at least a part of the first frame body” and it is also unclear what is meant by “going away from the rotation axis” such there appears to be no specific direction for “going away” from the axis. The location where the claimed distance decreases cannot be ascertained. Thus, there appears to be no reference frame or context whereby one could envisage the positional relationships between the structures as recited. See also MPEP § 2173.05(b), Section II, citing Ex parte Miyazaki, 89 USPQ2d 1207 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 2008) (precedential) and Ex parte Brummer, 12 USPQ2d 1653 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1989). For the purposes of examination, the limitation will be treated as: “wherein there is a distance between portions of the first frame body opposing to each other in a direction parallel to a rotation axis”.
2. Claim 6 recites the limitation: “wherein an amount of a resin in a portion of the first resin body in which curvature of the first frame body changes is larger than an amount of a resin in surroundings of the portion of the first frame body out of the first resin body”. It is unclear in what manner the amount of resin is measured such that the claimed differing amounts may be quantified, thereby rendering the metes and bounds of the claim scope unclear. Furthermore, it is unclear where “the surroundings of the portion of the first frame body out of the first resin body” are located, since these said surroundings could refer to innumerable positions. See detailed discussion supra of claim 3 rejection. For the purposes of examination, the limitation will be treated as inherent.
3. Similarly, Claim 7 recites the limitation: “wherein an amount of a resin in a connecting portion of the first resin body between the first frame body and the first torsion bar is larger than an amount of a resin in surroundings of the connecting portion of the first resin body.” See discussion of claim 6 rejection supra. For the purposes of examination, the limitation will be treated as inherent.
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.
Claims 1-4 and 6-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kono (JP 2015152869 A; as cited in the IDS filed 07/18/2025).
The Examiner notes that the text of foreign references as cited throughout this Office Action are to the English translation retrieved from the Patent Translate feature of https://worldwide.espacenet.com and provided herewith.
Regarding Claim 1, Kono discloses: An optical scanning device (¶0048: optical scanning device 100) comprising: a movable reflector (¶0049: mirror unit 200 provided on one surface 20); a first frame body made of metal that is located in at least a part of a region surrounding the movable reflector (¶0021: frame portion 6, the movable plate 2, and the torsion spring portion 4 are formed by etching or pressing a rectangular metal plate that is long in the vertical direction); a first torsion bar made of metal that is connected to the movable reflector and the first frame body (¶0017: pair of torsion springs 4 are arranged on a straight line along a first direction (in this embodiment, the vertical direction) parallel to one surface 20 (the front surface in this embodiment) of the movable plate 2, and connect the ends of the movable plate 2 in the first direction to the frame 6); and a first resin body provided over at least a part of the first frame body (¶0024: A reinforcing member 61 made of resin material, metal material, or the like is provided on the back of the frame portion 6).
Regarding Claim 2, Kono discloses the optical scanning device according to Claim 1, as above. Kono further discloses: a second frame body made of metal that is located in at least a part of a region surrounding the first frame body (¶0021: a rectangular outer frame 8 that surrounds the frame portion 6…frame portion are formed by etching or pressing a rectangular metal plate that is long in the vertical direction); a second torsion bar made of metal that is connected to the first frame body and the second frame body (¶0017: pair of torsion springs 4 are arranged on a straight line along a first direction (in this embodiment, the vertical direction) parallel to one surface 20 (the front surface in this embodiment) of the movable plate 2, and connect the ends of the movable plate 2 in the first direction to the frame 6; see FIGS. 1-2 showing second torsion bar 4 as claimed); and a second resin body provided over at least a part of the second frame body (¶0024: A reinforcing member 61 made of resin material, metal material, or the like is provided on the back of the frame portion 6; see FIG. 2 showing a second resin body 61 provided over at least a part of the second frame body 8).
Regarding Claim 3, as best understood, Kono discloses the optical scanning device according to Claim 1, as above. Kono further discloses: wherein a distance between both portions of the first frame body opposing to each other in a direction parallel to a rotation axis of the first frame body decreases in at least a part of the first frame body as going away from the rotation axis (¶0023, 0052; see FIG. 1 showing distance between both portions of the first frame body 6 opposing to each other in a direction parallel to a rotation axis of the first frame body decreases in at least a part of the first frame body as going away from the rotation axis).
Regarding Claim 4, Kono discloses the optical scanning device according to Claim 1, as above. Kono further discloses: a protrusion which is provided at at least one of an outer edge or an inner edge of the first frame body and a tip of which is exposed from the first resin body (¶0023: A pair of torsion springs 7 are provided at both ends of the frame 6 in the left-right direction, protruding from the central part in the up-down direction in the left-right direction; see FIGS. 1-2).
Regarding Claim 6, as best understood, Kono discloses the optical scanning device according to Claim 1, as above. Kono further discloses: wherein an amount of a resin in a portion of the first resin body in which curvature of the first frame body changes is larger than an amount of a resin in surroundings of the portion of the first frame body out of the first resin body (¶0023-24; see FIG. 2 showing amount of resin in a portion of the first resin body 61 in which curvature of the first frame body 6 changes is larger than an amount of a resin in surroundings of the portion of the first frame body 6 out of the first resin body 61).
Regarding Claim 7, as best understood, Kono discloses the optical scanning device according to Claim 1, as above. Kono further discloses: wherein an amount of a resin in a connecting portion of the first resin body between the first frame body and the first torsion bar is larger than an amount of a resin in surroundings of the connecting portion of the first resin body (¶0024; see FIG. 2 showing an amount of a resin in a connecting portion of the first resin body 61 between the first frame body 6 and the first torsion bar 4 is larger than an amount of a resin in surroundings of the connecting portion of the first resin body 61).
Regarding Claim 8, Kono discloses the optical scanning device according to Claim 1, as above. Kono further discloses: wherein at least one hole is provided on a surface of a portion of the first resin body that is not overlapped with the first frame body (¶0022: holes 9 are provided at four corners of outer frame 8; ¶0024; see FIG. 2).
Regarding Claim 9, Kono discloses the optical scanning device according to Claim 1, as above. Kono further discloses: wherein a width, in a direction parallel to the rotation axis of the first frame body, of the permanent magnet is equal to or larger than 95% and equal to or less than 105% of a width, in the direction parallel to the rotation axis of the first frame body, of a portion of the first frame body at which the permanent magnet is mounted (¶0024: Magnets 5 are provided at both the upper and lower ends of the back surface; see FIG. 2 showing width of magnet 5 is equal to the width of a portion of the first frame body 6 at which the permanent magnet is mounted).
Regarding Claim 10, Kono discloses the optical scanning device according to Claim 1, as above. Kono further discloses: A sensor device (¶0048: measurement unit 234) comprising: a light-emitting element (¶0049: The light irradiation unit 23 has a laser 231 (light source)); and a light detection element that detects light emitted from the light-emitting element, reflected by the movable reflector, and reflected or scattered by an object that exists outside of the optical scanning device (¶0055: light receiving section 232; ¶0049: an optical irradiation unit 23 that irradiates light onto the mirror unit 200; ¶0048: The optical scanning device 100 scan a predetermined detection range F1 with the irradiated light L1, and receives the reflected light L2 reflected from an object within the detection range F1 with the light receiving unit 232).
Claims 1-2, 5 and 7-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kono (JP 2016045335 A; hereinafter as “Kono 2”).
Regarding Claim 1, Kono 2 discloses: An optical scanning device (¶0010: optical scanning device) comprising: a movable reflector (¶0041: the mirror portion 9); a first frame body made of metal that is located in at least a part of a region surrounding the movable reflector (¶0054: the movable plate 4 is made of metal; see FIG. 3 showing first frame body 4 located in at least a part of a region surrounding the movable reflector 9); a first torsion bar made of metal that is connected to the movable reflector and the first frame body (¶0018: The other end of the torsion spring section 3A is connected to the movable plate 4; ¶0044: When rotational torque is applied to the movable plate 4, the torsion spring section 3A vibrate in a twisting motion around the axis of rotation; ¶0064: the materials for the torsion spring sections 3A and 3B may be other metal materials; see FIGS. 1 & 4 showing first torsion bar made 3A of metal that is connected to the movable reflector 9 and the first frame body 4); and a first resin body provided over at least a part of the first frame body (¶0053: joint strength between the holding part 6A and the movable plate 4; ¶0047: the pair of holding parts 6A and 6B are connected via third pieces 63A, 64A, 63B, and 64B, the stress load on the holding parts 6A and 6B can be distributed; ¶0053: the movable plate 4 and the holding parts 6A and 6B are made of the same material; ¶0064: in addition to metal materials, resins, etc., may also be used; ¶0038-39: second piece 62A, third pieces 63A and 64A are joined via a resin adhesive; see FIG. 4 showing resin body 6A+41A).
Regarding Claim 2, Kono 2 discloses the optical scanning device according to Claim 1, as above. Kono 2 further discloses: a second frame body made of metal that is located in at least a part of a region surrounding the first frame body (¶0061: the shape of the support portion 2 may be an annular frame shape; see FIG. 1); ; a second torsion bar made of metal that is connected to the first frame body and the second frame body (¶0017: The pair of torsion spring sections 3A and 3B are arranged within the space of the support section 2; ¶0019: The other end of the torsion spring section 3B is connected to the movable plate 4) and a second resin body provided over at least a part of the second frame body (¶0047: the pair of holding parts 6A and 6B are connected via third pieces 63A, 64A, 63B, and 64B, the stress load on the holding parts 6A and 6B can be distributed; ¶0053: the movable plate 4 and the holding parts 6A and 6B are made of the same material; see FIG. 4 showing second resin body 6B+41B over second frame body 2).
Regarding Claim 5, Kono 2 discloses the optical scanning device according to Claim 1, as above. Kono 2 further discloses: wherein a weld of a resin forming the first resin body is formed in a portion that is different from a portion of the first frame body that is connected to the first torsion bar (¶0067: the second piece 62A and the magnet 5, and the second piece 62B and the magnet 5 may be joined by welding; see FIG. 1 showing weld of resin body is formed in a portion that is different from a portion of the first frame body 4 that is connected to the first torsion bar 3A).
Regarding Claim 7, as best understood, Kono 2 discloses the optical scanning device according to Claim 1, as above. Kono 2 further discloses: wherein an amount of a resin in a connecting portion of the first resin body between the first frame body and the first torsion bar is larger than an amount of a resin in surroundings of the connecting portion of the first resin body (¶0027; see FIG. 4 showing an amount of a resin in a connecting portion of the first resin body 6A between the first frame body 4 and the first torsion bar 3A is larger than an amount of a resin in surroundings of the connecting portion of the first resin body 6A).
Regarding Claim 8, Kono 2 discloses the optical scanning device according to Claim 1, as above. Kono 2 further discloses: wherein at least one hole is provided on a surface of a portion of the first resin body that is not overlapped with the first frame body (¶0035: the holding parts 6A and 6B are formed using portions punched out as holes 41A and 41B).
Regarding Claim 9, Kono 2 discloses the optical scanning device according to Claim 1, as above. Kono 2 further discloses: wherein a width, in a direction parallel to the rotation axis of the first frame body, of the permanent magnet is equal to or larger than 95% and equal to or less than 105% of a width, in the direction parallel to the rotation axis of the first frame body, of a portion of the first frame body at which the permanent magnet is mounted (¶0023: the magnet 5 is positioned approximately in the center of the mounting surface 4g of the movable plate 4…The shape of magnet 5 is a rectangular prism; see FIG. 1 showing width of magnet 5 is equal to the width of a portion of the first frame body 4 at which the permanent magnet is mounted).
Other Relevant Documents Considered
Prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant’s disclosure: Suzuki et al. (US 2021/0033848 A1), Fujimoto (US 2016/0006330 A1), and Yamada (US 2012/0162739 A1) all disclose an optical scanning device comprising a movable reflector, a first frame body, a first torsion bar, and further satisfying some of the additional conditions as claimed.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAMANVITHA SRIDHAR whose telephone number is (571)270-0082. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 930-1800 (EST).
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.
/SAMANVITHA SRIDHAR/Examiner, Art Unit 2872
/WYATT A STOFFA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2881