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 .
Status
The filing on 06/04/2026 amended claims 11, 17, 19 and added claim 25. Claims 11-25 are pending and rejected.
Objection/s to the Application, Drawings and Claims
The filing on 06/04/2026 appropriately amended the title, claims 17 and 19; hence the objection/s to the title, the claims 17 and 19 made in the last office action are withdrawn.
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 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 11-16 and 19-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Furui (JP 2016133703 A).
Regarding claim 11, Furui teaches a projection optical apparatus (Fig. 1-4) that is removably installed in a light emitting apparatus (1), the light emitting apparatus (1) including an exterior enclosure (2) and a fixing portion (4/41), the exterior enclosure (2) accommodating an image generator (351R/B/G), the projection optical apparatus being configured to project light emitted from the light emitting apparatus (1), the projection optical apparatus comprising: a plurality of lenses (51) defining an optical axis (OA); a lens barrel (52) holding the plurality of lenses (51); and a first grip (55/56) extending outward from an exterior of the lens barrel (52), wherein the lens barrel (52) includes a lens barrel main body (522) and a flange (53/53A) protruding outward from the lens barrel main body (522), the flange (53/53A) is coupled to the light emitting apparatus (1), the flange (53/53A) is attached to the fixing portion (4/41), and the first grip (55/56) is attached to the flange (53/53A); and includes a first arm (561), a second arm (562), and a coupling section (563) mechanically joining the first and second arms (561, 562), the coupling section (563) is spatially shifted from the lens barrel main body in a direction orthogonal to the optical axis (OA), and the coupling section (563) does not overlap the optical axis (OA; Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 12, Furui further teaches the plurality of lenses (51) includes a projection lens disposed in a position closest to an enlargement side of the plurality of lenses (51), the lens barrel (52) includes a projection part (521/523) extending outward from the lens barrel main body (522) and holding the projection lens, and the first grip (55/56) extends outward beyond the projection part (521/523; Fig. 2-4).
Regarding claim 13, Furui further teaches the lens barrel main body (522) has a cylindrical shape around an optical axis (OA) of a lens of the plurality of lenses (51), and the flange (53/53A) protrudes outward from the lens barrel main body (522) in a radial direction thereof (Fig. 2-4).
Regarding claim 14, Furui further teaches a cover member (522) covering part of the lens barrel (52).
Regarding claim 15, Furui further teaches the first grip (55/56) is removably attached to the flange (53/53A).
Regarding claim 16, Furui further teaches the lens barrel (52) includes an attachment part (53A/535/N/5611/5621) to which the first grip (55/56) is attached.
Regarding claim 19, Furui further teaches the flange (53/53A) includes fixing members (screws), and the fixing members (screws) are fixed to fixing portion (4/41)s of the light emitting apparatus (1).
Regarding claim 20, Furui further teaches a light modulator (351R/G/B) modulating light emitted from a light source (311); and the projection optical apparatus according to claim 11.
Regarding claim 21, Furui further teaches a focus adjuster (523) that performs focus adjustment on an image displayed.
Regarding claim 22, Furui further teaches the plurality of lenses (51) includes a focusing lens (51), and the focusing lens is disposed on the light emitting section (Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 23, Furui further teaches the flange (53/53A) is removably attached to the fixing portion (4/41) of the light emitting apparatus (1; Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 24, Furui further teaches a first size of the flange (53/53A) viewed in a first direction along the radial direction is equal to a second size of the projection part (521/523) viewed in the first direction (Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 25, Furui further teaches the coupling section (563) extends along a direction intersecting the optical axis (OA) and joins the first and second arms (561, 562) to form a U-shape (Fig. 4).
Claim Rejections - AIA 35 USC § 103
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 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
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 of this title, 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.
Claims 17 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Furui in view of Kuroda (US 20190219802 A1).
Regarding claim 17, Furui further teaches the lens barrel (52) includes a light incident section through which light emitted from the light emitting apparatus (1) passes along the optical axis (OA) to a light emitting section (Fig. 1-4).
Furui does not teach a first reflector being held by the lens barrel (52), wherein light emitted from the light incident section and reflected off the first reflector passes along a second optical axis intersecting with the first optical axis to the light emitting section.
Kuroda teaches a first reflector (13) being held by the lens barrel (18), wherein light emitted from the light incident section (11) and reflected off the first reflector (13) passes along a second optical axis (CL2) intersecting with the first optical axis (CL1) to the light emitting section (12).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skills in the art at the time of the invention to combine Furui with Kuroda; because it makes handling of the projection lens of Kuroda easier to manage during lens replacement.
Regarding claim 18, the combination of Furui and Kuroda consequently results in the first grip (55/56 of Furui) is attached to the light incident section (Fig. 2-4 of Furui).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments with respect to claim 11 have been fully considered but are found not persuasive; hence the rejection/s of all pending claims are maintained.
Regarding claim 11, applicant/s argue,
In contrast, claim 11 affirmatively recites a different mechanical interface of resulting elements and “spatially shifted... orthogonal to the optical axis”, such that claim 11 grip subject matter is structurally distinguished from Furui. Furthermore, the recited negative limitation precludes potential use of Furui's flush/parallel mounting alignment. Secondary reference Kuroda has no disclosure of exterior grips or any other subject matter specifically relevant to such features.
For at least this reason, the references fail to teach or suggest each and every limitation of independent claim 11. Independent claim 11 is patentably distinct from the cited art and is allowable. (Remarks; p. 7-8).
Examiner respectfully disagrees. Furui clearly and unambiguously teaches “a first arm (561), a second arm (562), and a coupling section (563) mechanically joining the first and second arms (561, 562), the coupling section (563) is spatially shifted from the lens barrel main body in a direction orthogonal to the optical axis (OA), and the coupling section (563) does not overlap the optical axis (OFig. 4).”
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 extension fee 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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BAO-LUAN Q LE whose telephone number is (571)270-5362. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday; 9:00AM-5:00PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Minh-Toan Ton can be reached on (571) 272 230303. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
Any response to this action should be mailed to:
Commissioner for Patents
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
Or faxed to:
(571) 273-8300, (for formal communications intended for entry)
Or:
(571) 273-7490, (for informal or draft communications, please label “PROPOSED” or “DRAFT”)
Hand-delivered responses should be brought to:
Customer Service Window
Randolph Building
401 Dulany Street
Alexandria, VA 22314
/BAO-LUAN Q LE/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2882
Prosecution Insights