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 .
This action is in response to Amendments and Remarks filed on 03/03/2026
Application claims a FP date of 07/12/2023
Claims 1, 20 and 23 are independent and have been amended
Claims 1-29 are pending
Response to Arguments
The Examiner acknowledges Applicant's amendments and remarks filed on 03/03/2026. They have been fully considered and are persuasive in the part. Applicant’s remarks and Amendments are sufficient to overcome the rejections based on the Specification and Drawing and those rejections have been withdrawn. However, with respect to the rejections based on prior art, the amendments are not sufficient to overcome the rejections, nor are the arguments persuasive.
Examiner believes that the cited reference teaches the claimed invention. However, to hasten prosecution, Examiner has brought in a new reference who clearly disclosed the amendments made in the independent claims and a detailed explanation is provided in the following action.
In view of the above arguments, Examiner would like to maintain the rejections as detailed in the following action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1, 20 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claims contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Amended independent claims recite “in the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses this terminology, the applicant is requested to clarify the record by stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP 608.01(o) and 2181.
Claims 1, 20 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the enablement requirement. The claims contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention. Amended independent claims recite “in
Claims 1, 20 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, because the best mode contemplated by the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s) has not been disclosed. Evidence of concealment of the best mode is based upon the fact that Amended independent claims recite “in
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 amended limitation “in 1, 20 and 23 must be shown or the features canceled from the claims 1, 20 and 23. 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.
Claim Rejections - 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.
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.
Claims 1-8, 16, 20 and 22-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwon et al. (U.S. Patent Publication Number 2022/0146912 A1) in view of IM et al. (U. S. Patent Publication Number 2022/0099947 A1) and further in view of Shin et al. (U. S. Patent Publication Number 2022/0350108 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Kwon discloses a camera module (Fig 1- camera module 1000) comprising:
a housing (Fig 1, 2- housing 1100) having an internal space (Figs 1 and 2 discloses this);
a reflective member (Fig 1, 2- Reflective module 1300) disposed in the internal space (Figs 1 and 2 discloses this);
a lens barrel (Fig 1- lens module 1200) spaced apart from the reflective member (Figs 1 and 2 discloses this), and configured to be movable relative to the reflective member in one or more of three axial directions intersecting each other (In ¶0053, Kwon discloses that the lens module 1200 may move in the optical axis direction (Y axis) with respect to the housing 1100); and
an image sensor (Fig 1, 2- image sensor 1500) spaced apart from the reflective member (Figs 1-2 and 7-8 discloses that the image sensor is spaced apart from the reflective member 1300 and the lens module 1200), and comprising an imaging surface intersecting an optical axis direction (Figs 1-2, 7-8 discloses that the image sensor intersects the Y axis – which is the optical axis),
wherein the lens barrel and the image sensor are disposed closer to an object than the reflective member is (Fig 7-8 clearly discloses this feature), and are spaced apart from each other in a direction intersecting the optical axis direction (Fig 7-8 also clearly discloses this feature).
Kwon discloses that lens module 1200 may move in the optical axis direction (Y axis) with respect to the housing 1100, Kwon fails to clearly disclose lens be movable relative to the reflective member in one or more of three axial directions intersecting each other.
Instead in a similar endeavor, IM discloses lens (Fig 4 – lens module 1200) be movable relative to the reflective member (Fig 4- reflective member 1400; In ¶0069-¶0070 IM teaches that the reflective module 1400 may include a reflective member 1410 and a holder 1420 and the housing 1010 includes a support structure 1020 capable of accommodating the holder 1420) in one or more of three axial directions intersecting each other (In ¶0110, IM teaches that the lens module 1200 may be movably provide in the housing 1010 and he further teaches that the lens module 1200 may move in a direction parallel to the optical axis (Y axis) with respect to the housing 1010).
Kwon and IM are combinable because both are related to camara modules.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to move the lens module with respect to the housing and reflective module as taught by IM in the imaging module disclosed by Kwon.
The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to “provide autofocus and zoom capabilities” as disclosed by IM in ¶0110.
Kwon and IM fails to clearly disclose lens be movable relative to the reflective member in
Instead in a similar endeavor, Shin discloses lens be movable relative to the reflective member in (Shin in ¶0004 teaches that the camera module may include an actuator that directly moves lens module or indirectly moves a reflective module including a reflective member stabilizing an optical image. In addition, the actuator may move or rotate the lens module or the reflective module in various directions using driving force generated by a magnet or a coil. Since Shin teaches moving the lens in various directions, it is clear that Shin discloses the amended limitation in the independent claims).
Kwon, IM and Shin are combinable because all are related to camara modules.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to move the lens module in various direction with respect to the housing and reflective module as taught by Shin in the imaging module disclosed by Kwon in view of IM.
The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to “provide AF and OIS functionality” as disclosed by Shin throughout his disclosure.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Kwon, IM and Shin to obtain the invention as specified in claim 1.
Regarding Claim 2, Kwon in view of IM and Shin discloses wherein one surface of the housing comprises one or more openings exposing the internal space to an outside of the housing (Kwon: In Figs 1 and 2, Kwon discloses an L shaped interspace and the two legs of the L shape has been considered as two interspace), and the lens barrel and the image sensor are disposed in the one or more openings (Kwon: In Figs 1 and 2, Kwon discloses the lens barrel 1200 and the image sensor 1500 are housed in the two portions of this L shape. The are place adjacent to each other and both are in front of the reflective member 1300).
Regarding Claim 3, Kwon in view of IM and Shin discloses wherein the three axial directions are the optical axis direction (Kwon: Kwon discloses that the optical axis direction is the Y axis direction and the other axis are the X axis and Z axis), a first axis direction perpendicular to the optical axis direction, and a second axis direction perpendicular to both the optical axis direction and the first axis direction (Kwon: Kwon’s disclosure of the X axis and Z axis are both perpendicular to the optical axis), and the lens barrel and the image sensor are spaced apart from the reflective member upward in the optical axis direction (Kwon: This is disclosed in Fig 1 where Kwon discloses that the image sensor 1500 and the lens module 1200 are spaced apart from each other and the reflective member 1300. Figs 7-8 also disclose this feature.).
Regarding Claim 4, Kwon in view of IM and Shin discloses further comprising: a holder (IM: Fig 4 – Lens holder 1220) coupled to the lens barrel (IM: Fig 4 – lens barrel 1210); a carrier (IM: Fig 4 – Support structure 1201) accommodating the holder (IM: Fig 4 – Lens holder 1220; Fig 4 teaches that the lens holder 1220 is accommodated in the support structure; ¶0091-¶0092); and a focus adjustment unit configured to generate a driving force in the optical axis direction, and comprising a first magnet disposed on the carrier, and a first coil facing the first magnet (IM: In ¶0113-¶0117, IM teaches about the magnet 1231 and 1232 provided in the lens module and coils 1251 and 1252 provided in the housing 1010 and the Lorentz force generated in the coils 1251 and 1252 and the magnets 1231 and 1232 may cause the lens module 1200 to move with respect to the housing 1010 to provide autofocusing function).
Regarding Claim 5, Kwon in view of IM and Shin discloses wherein a partial portion of the reflective member is disposed inside the carrier (IM: In Fig 2 – IM teaches that the reflective member 1410 overlaps the lens module 1220 partially;).
Regarding Claim 6, Kwon in view of IM and Shin discloses wherein a partial portion of the image sensor is disposed inside the carrier (IM: Fig 2 – image sensor 1300 is inside the housing and partially overlapping the carrier).
Regarding Claim 7, Kwon in view of IM discloses wherein at least a partial portion of the focus adjustment unit is disposed to overlap the reflective member in a direction perpendicular to the optical axis direction (IM: In Fig 2 – IM teaches that the reflective member 1410 partially overlaps the lens module 1220 along the X axis which is perpendicular to the optical axis direction (Y axis)).
Regarding Claim 8, Kwon in view of IM and Shin discloses wherein a partial portion of the first magnet and a partial portion of the first coil (IM: In ¶0113-¶0117, IM teaches about the magnet 1231 and 1232 provided in the lens module and coils 1251 and 1252) are disposed to overlap the reflective member in a direction in which the first magnet and the first coil face each other (IM: IM teaches this in Fig 7. However, in a first look, it appears that the magnet 1231 is horizontal and coil 1251 is vertical. But a closer look will reveal that the lens module is rotated counter clockwise by 900 – and it will then be clear that the overlap to the reflective member is in the same direction.).
Regarding Claim 16, Kwon in view of IM and Shin discloses wherein at least a partial portion of a bottom surface of the housing facing the image sensor in the optical axis direction is inclined with respect to the optical axis direction (Kwon: Kwon discloses this in Fig 9 and corresponding disclosure where he discloses that the optical path between the lens module 1200 and the image sensor 1500 tilts)
Regarding Claim 20, this claim has limitations parallel to claim 1. Since Kwon in Figs 7-9 discloses that at least one surface of the reflective member 1310 intersects the optical axis direction, Kwon in view of IM and Shin discloses all the limitations of Claim 20. Therefore Claim 20 is rejected on the same grounds as Claim 1.
Regarding Claim 22, this claim has limitations parallel to claim 16. Claim 22 is therefore rejected on the same grounds as Claim 16.
Regarding Claim 23, this claim has limitations parallel to claim 1. Since Kwon in Figs 7-9 discloses that one surface of the reflective member 1310 comprises an incident surface and an emission surface, Kwon in view of IM and Shin discloses all the limitations of Claim 23. Therefore Claim 23 is rejected on the same grounds as Claim 1.
Regarding Claim 24, Kwon in view of IM and Shin discloses wherein the reflective member comprises at three reflective surfaces configured to reflect light from the lens module received through the incident surface to the imaging surface of the image sensor through the emission surface (Kwon: Kwon discloses this in Fig 9 and corresponding disclosure where he discloses that the optical path between the lens module 1200 and the image sensor 1500 tilts)
Claims 12-15, 18 and 25-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwon et al. (U.S. Patent Publication Number 2022/0146912 A1) in view of IM et al. (U. S. Patent Publication Number 2022/0099947 A1) and further in view of Shin et al. (U. S. Patent Publication Number 2022/0350108 A1) as applied to Claim 1 above and further in view of Jang (U. S. Patent Publication Number 2022/0014653 A1)
Regarding Claim 12, Kwon in view of IM and Shin fails to clearly disclose further comprising: a holder coupled to the lens barrel; and an optical image stabilization unit configured to generate a driving force in a first axis direction and a second axis direction perpendicular to each other while intersecting the optical axis direction, and comprising a second magnet and a third magnet disposed on the holder, and a second coil and a third coil disposed on the housing.
Instead in a similar endeavor, Jang discloses further comprising: a holder (Fig 14a-28 - Lens assembly 222) coupled to the lens barrel (Fig 16-17 – lens unit 222c); and
an optical image stabilization unit (Figs 2, 3, 4, 14a-26b – second actuator 200 which in ¶0149 Jang teaches to be an OIS actuator; OIS unit 220 and driving unit 72C (see Fig 15)) configured to generate a driving force in a first axis direction and a second axis direction perpendicular to each other while intersecting the optical axis direction (See ¶0238-¶0249), and comprising a second magnet and a third magnet disposed on the holder (In Fig 16a and 17a, 17b, Jang teaches that the driving magnet 72M is part of the lens assembly 220), and a second coil and a third coil disposed on the housing (In Fig 15, Jang teaches the coils 72C1, 72C2 and 73C3 disposed on the housing 250).
Kwon, IM, Shin and Jang are combinable because all are related to camara modules using reflective elements.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement OIS functionality in the lens module as taught by Jang in the imaging module disclosed by Kwon in view of IM and Shin.
The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to “minimize the occurrence of a decent or a tilt to produce the best optical characteristic” as disclosed by Jang in ¶0283.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Kwon, IM, Shin and Jang to obtain the invention as specified in claim 12.
Regarding Claim 13, Kwon in view of IM, Shin and Jang discloses wherein at least a partial portion of the optical image stabilization unit is disposed to overlap the reflective member in the first axis direction and in the second axis direction (Jang: In ¶0299, Jang teaches that to provide an ultra-slim camera module, by utilizing the space under the prism unit 230 and arranging the OIS unit 220 to overlap each other. Fig 16b discloses the overlap in two direction).
Regarding Claim 14, Kwon in view of IM, Shin and Jang discloses wherein at least a partial portion of each of the second magnet and the second coil is disposed to overlap the reflective member in a direction in which the second magnet and the second coil face each other, and at least a partial portion of each of the third magnet and the third coil is arranged to overlap the reflective member in a direction in which the third magnet and the third coil face each other (Jang: Jang teaches this in Figs 14b-18. Fig 14b teaches the different units and Fig 15 teaches the placement of the coils 72C. Fig 16a teaches the placement of the magnets 72M and Fis 16b and 17a teach how the magnets face the coils and overlap the reflective member)
Regarding Claim 15, Kwon in view of IM, Shin and Jang discloses wherein the optical image stabilization unit is disposed to be higher than the reflective member in the optical axis direction (Jang: Fig 114b-19 teaches that at least a portion of the OIS unit is disposed higher than the reflective member 230)
Regarding Claim 18, Kwon in view of IM, Shin and Jang discloses further comprising a carrier disposed inside the housing (Jang: In Fig 16a, Jang teaches the OIS unit 220 and the lens assembly and holder 222 – which is housed inside the main housing), wherein the lens barrel is disposed inside the carrier (Jang: In Fig 17b, Jang teaches that the lens unit 222c is disposed inside the unit 222), the carrier and the lens barrel are configured to be movable together in a first axis direction perpendicular to the optical axis direction and in a second axis direction perpendicular to both the optical axis direction and the first axis direction (Figs 2, 3, 4, 14a-26b – second actuator 200 which in ¶0149 Jang teaches to be an OIS actuator; OIS unit 220 and driving unit 72C (see Fig 15); Also See ¶0238-¶0249), and the lens barrel is configured to be movable relative to the carrier in the optical axis direction (Kwon: In ¶0053, Kwon discloses that the lens module 1200 may move in the optical axis direction (Y axis) with respect to the housing 1100).
Regarding Claim 25, Kwon in view of IM, Shin and Jang discloses further comprising a focus adjustment unit configured to move the lens module in a direction of the optical axis relative to the reflective member (Kwon: In ¶0053, Kwon discloses that the lens module 1200 may move in the optical axis direction (Y axis) with respect to the housing 1100); and
an optical image stabilization unit configured to move the lens module in a direction perpendicular to the optical axis (Jang: Figs 2, 3, 4, 14a-26b – second actuator 200 which in ¶0149 Jang teaches to be an OIS actuator; OIS unit 220 and driving unit 72C (see Fig 15)).
Regarding Claim 26, Kwon in view of IM, Shin and Jang discloses wherein at least a partial portion of the focus adjustment unit is disposed to overlap the reflective member in a direction perpendicular to the optical axis (IM: In Fig 2 – IM teaches that the reflective member 1410 partially overlaps the lens module 1220 along the X axis which is perpendicular to the optical axis direction (Y axis)).
Regarding Claim 27, Kwon in view of IM, Shin and Jang discloses wherein the focus adjustment unit is disposed between the reflective member and the object (IM: In ¶0097 teaches that the driving elements required for focusing may be provided in the lens holder 1220 – which is between the object and the reflective member 1410).
Regarding Claim 28, this claim has limitations parallel to claim 13. Claim 28 is therefore rejected on the same grounds as Claim 13.
Regarding Claim 29, Kwon in view of IM, Shin and Jang discloses wherein the optical image stabilization unit (Figs 2, 3, 4, 14a-26b – second actuator 200 which in ¶0149 Jang teaches to be an OIS actuator) is disposed between the reflective member and the object (Jang: Figs 2-3 disclose this feature).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9, 17, 19, 21 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.
Claims 10-11 are objected as they depend on objected claim 9.
Reference Cited
The following prior art made of record but not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Park et al. (U.S. Patent Publication Number 2020/0396358 A1) discloses a camera module includes a housing, a rotation holder including a reflection member, and supported on an inner wall of the housing such that the reflection member is rotatable about a first axis, perpendicular to an optical axis and parallel to a bottom of the housing, a magnet provided on a side surface of the rotation holder, parallel to an optical axis direction, and a first position detection sensor provided in the housing to face the magnet and configured to sense movement of the rotation holder in a second axis direction, perpendicular to the optical axis and the first axis, wherein the magnet is disposed to be biased in a direction, opposite to the inner wall of the housing on which the rotation holder is supported in the optical axis direction.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PADMA HALIYUR whose telephone number is (571)272-3287. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7AM - 4PM.
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.
/PADMA HALIYUR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2639 March 24, 2026