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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 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.
Claim(s) 1 – 2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hagiwara (US 2020/0183123).
Regarding claim 1, Hagiwara discloses, in at least figures 1 – 3, an optical element driving mechanism (12), comprising: a movable portion (16) for connecting an optical element (14) (¶50); a fixed portion (18) (¶50), wherein the movable portion is movable relative to the fixed portion (¶55); and a driving component (coil 34/magnet 42) configured to drive the movable portion to move relative to the fixed portion (¶61).
Regarding claim 2, Hagiwara discloses the limitations of claim 1. Hagiwara also teaches wherein the fixed portion comprises: a frame (22); a base (20) fixedly connected to the frame (¶50); and a positioning component (46/48), wherein the frame is fixedly connected to the base via the positioning component (fig. 4); wherein the driving component is partially connected to the frame (via 38), and the driving component is partially connected to the base (via 32) (fig. 4).
Claim(s) 1 – 2, 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sasaki (US 2007/0035210).
Regarding claim 1, Sasaki discloses, in at least figures 6 – 9, an optical element driving mechanism (40), comprising: a movable portion (48/50) for connecting an optical element (44/46) (¶51); a fixed portion (30/42) (¶55), wherein the movable portion is movable relative to the fixed portion (¶51); and a driving component (10/11) configured to drive the movable portion to move relative to the fixed portion (¶53).
Regarding claim 2, Sasaki discloses the limitations of claim 1. Sasaki also teaches wherein the fixed portion comprises: a frame (42); a base (30) fixedly connected to the frame (¶50); and a positioning component (corresponding notches on top of 42 and sides of 30), wherein the frame is fixedly connected to the base via the positioning component (fig. 6); wherein the driving component is partially connected to the frame (via 38), and the driving component is partially connected to the base (via 30) (fig. 6-9).
Regarding claim 8, Sasaki discloses the limitations of claim 1. Sasaki also teaches wherein the driving component comprises: a driving element (12) configured to generate a driving force (¶30); a transmitting element (14) configured to transmit the driving force (¶30); and a counterweight element (18) made of metal and connected to the driving element (¶30, 34), wherein the driving element is located between the transmitting element and the counterweight element (fig. 9); wherein the transmitting element is connected to the frame (via 16/48/52, see ¶51,59), the counterweight element is connected to the base (via 28) (fig. 6-9; ¶55), and the driving element does not contact the base nor the frame (fig. 6-9).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3 – 7 and 9 – 20 are 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Contact
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANTOINETTE T. SPINKS whose telephone number is (571)270-3749. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 7am - 5pm 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, 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.
/ANTOINETTE T SPINKS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2639