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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 06/29/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the amendments of claim(s) 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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) 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mori (JP 2012203340 A, See Espacenet Translation) in view of Sumino (JP2010176971A, see Espacenet Translation).
In regards to Claim 1, Mori discloses (look to Fig. 8-10), An operation member comprising:
a stationary frame having a form of a cylinder (Fig. 8-10: lens barrel body 110, second focus ring 30, and third focus ring 40);
an operation ring (Fig. 8-10: first focus ring 220) that is radially fitted to an outer periphery of the stationary frame (Fig. 8-10); movement of the operation ring in an axial direction of the cylinder being restricted (focus ring 220 can be rotated but not translated, see Fig. 11), the operation ring being operatable in a circumferential direction of the cylinder (Fig. 1 shows the generic geometry of all the embodiments, specifically it labels the circumferential groove present in Fig. 8-10 as groove 12) [Par 36],
an end face-contact portion (Fig. 8-10: location of magnets 42 and 32 on focus rings 40 and 30) which is provided on the stationary frame (Fig. 8-10: combination of barrel body 110 and focus rings 30 and 40),
at least one magnet portions (Fig. 8-10: magnets 42, 122, and 32) that are provided on the operation ring at regular angular intervals in a circumferential direction (Fig. 8-10 is cross section view of the focus rings 220, 30, and 40 and lens barrel 110) [Page 7, Par 4];
at least one magnetic portion (magnet 122, 24, and 22) provided in an inner circumference of the operation ring (magnets 122, 24, and 22 are provided at an inner circumference of ring 22) at a regular angular interval around an axis of the cylinder (magnet 24, and 22 are at a regular interval)
a first magnetic portion (Fig. 8-10: magnet 112) provided on an outer peripheral surface of the stationary frame (Fig. 8-10: magnet 112 is on periphery of barrel 110),
the first magnetic portion (magnet 112) being configured to face the at least one magnetic portion (magnet 122) while having a gap between the at least one magnetic portion and the first magnetic portion (magnet 112 is separated from magnet 122), and to generate first attractive force acting between the operation ring and the stationary frame in a radial direction (Fig. 4 describes the geometry which is similarly use in Fig: 8-10)[Par 66] of the cylinder by magnetic attractive force acting between the at least one magnetic portion and the first magnetic portion (Fig. 9: attractive and repulsive force between magnet 112 and magnet 122) [Par 87];
and a second magnetic portion (magnets 42 and 32) provided in the end face-contact portion, the second magnetic portion being configured to generate second attractive force acting between the operation ring and the stationary frame in the axial direction of the cylinder by magnetic attractive force acting between the at least one magnetic portion and the second magnetic portion to cause the end face of the operation ring to be in contact with the end face of the end face-contact portion (magnets 42 and 32 of the of the focus ring 40 are in physical contact with magnets 24 and 22 as seen in Fig. 9-10, due to attractive force, and due to the slight distance between magnets 112 and 122 will be slightly mismatched such that at least a portion of the attractive force is in an axial direction, upwards towards ring 220).
But Mori does not explicitly disclose, the operation ring to be operatable in a circumferential direction of the cylinder around an axis of the cylinder with respect to the stationary frame, while allowing the end face of the operation ring to slide on the end face of the end face-contact portion in a case where the operation ring is rotated around the axis of the cylinder with respect to the stationary frame, the end face-contact portion having an end face facing the axial direction to be in contact with an end of the operation ring, wherein in a case where the end face of the operation ring is in contact with tend face of the end fac-contact portion, the second attractive force is smaller than the first attractive force
However, within the same field of endeavor, Sumino teaches, on Fig. 2-3 and 5, that it is desirable in camera operations for the operation ring (Fig. 2-3: operation dial 60)[Par 26] to be operatable in a circumferential direction of the cylinder around an axis of the cylinder (“rotating the operation dial 60 around the axis of the annular holder 40 “) [Par 29] with respect to the stationary frame (annual holder 40) [Par 29], while allowing the end face of the operation ring (See Fig. 5B: bottom side of ring 60) to slide on the end face of the end face-contact portion (Fig. 3: bottom side of ring 60 slides on sliding sheet 20 and board 30 attached to annual holder 40) in a case where the operation ring is rotated around the axis of the cylinder with respect to the stationary frame(Fig. 2-3: “…he operating dial 60 is rotated about the axis of the annular holder 40, causing the operating dial 60 to slide on the sliding sheet 20 and the printed circuit board 30.” ), the end face-contact portion (Fig. 3B-3C: sliding sheet 20, circuit board 30, and attached connecting parts 42, inner ring 43, and magnet 50 which touch dial 60) having an end face facing the axial direction (top side from view of Fig. 3B-3C, of magnet 50, and ring 43, would be in the axial direction as can be seen in Fig. 3 and 5A) to be in contact with an end of the operation ring (magnet 50 and ring 43 can be seen in Fig. 3B-3C to be contacting dial 60).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to modify the system of Mori with Sumino in order to, prevent the operating from coming off the holder, as taught by [Par 28].
But Mori in view of Sumino does not explicitly teach wherein, wherein in a case where the end face of the operation ring is in contact with tend face of the end fac-contact portion, the second attractive force is smaller than the first attractive force.
However, Mori does teach, on Fig. 1-10, arrangements of magnets 22, 24, and 122 on the operation ring 220, and magnets 32, 42, and 112 on the stationary rings 30/40 [Par 35-37]. Further Mori teaches explicitly controlling the attractive and repulsive forces between said magnets [Par 15-17], and further that, “at least one of each pair of magnets, such as magnet 22 and magnet 32, and magnet 24 and magnet 42, is formed in a ring shape, thereby ensuring that an attractive force is obtained between the magnets regardless of the rotational position of the first focus ring 20.” [Par 39]. Thus, Mori teaches that it was known in the art at the time of the invention to optimize the power of the magnets, such that the attractive force between magnets, is obtained regardless of the rational position of the operational ring (focus ring 20). One of ordinary skill in the art would have been capable of simply changing the magnetic force of the magnets such that, wherein in a case where the end face of the operation ring is in contact with tend face of the end fac-contact portion, the second attractive force is smaller than the first attractive force. Further one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to provide a good switch feeling, and fix the operation ring (focus ring 20) in place, as taught by Mori [Par 49]
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to modify the system of Mori in view of Sumino, such that in a case where the end face of the operation ring is in contact with tend face of the end fac-contact portion, the second attractive force is smaller than the first attractive force, to provide a good switch feeling, and fix the operation ring (focus ring 20) in place, as taught by Mori [Par 49]
Re Claim 2, Mori in view of Sumino discloses, the operation member according to claim 1, and Mori further discloses on fig. 8, comprising a cylindrical member (focus ring 30 and 40) provided on the outer periphery of the stationary frame (barrel 110), wherein the operation ring (ring 220) is sandwiched between the end face-contact portion and the cylindrical member such that the movement of the operation ring in the axial direction of the cylinder is restricted (ring 220 is sandwiched between focus rings 30 and 40, and end face contact regions at magnet 42 and 32, such that its movement in anaxial direction, towards barrel 110 is restricted).
Re Claim 3, Mori in view of Sumino discloses, the operation member according to claim 1, and Mori further discloses on Fig. 8, wherein the first magnetic portion (magnet 112) and the second magnetic portion (magnets 42 and 32) are formed of an integrally molded product made of a magnetic material (all magnets are made of magnetic material).
Regarding the Product-by-Process limitations, the applicant is advised that, even though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process.” In re Thorpe, 227 USPQ 964, (Fed. Cir. 1985). In this case, the cited limitations, “formed of an integrally molded product”, failed to distinguish the claimed structure from the magnets of Mori. See MPEP § 2113.
In regards to Claim 4, Mori in view of Sumino discloses, the lens barrel according to claim 6, and Mori further discloses on Fig. 8-10, wherein the second magnetic portion (magnets 42 and 32) has a shape of a ring (Fig. 8-10: magnets 42 and 32 are on rings 40 and 30) that is radially fitted to the outer periphery of the stationary frame (Fig. 8-10: rings 30 and 40 are radially fitted to barrel body 110), and the first magnetic portion (Fig. 8-10: magnet 112) has a shape of a plate (Fig. 8-10 shows magnet 112 as a bar magnet) that extends from the second magnetic portion (Fig. 8-10: magnet 112 extends away from both magnets 42 and 32, which are adjacent by way of rings 40 and 30), along the outer peripheral surface of the stationary frame (barrel 110) in the axial direction of the cylinder (magnet 112 at least partially extends in an axial direction of the cylinder, towards ring 220).
Re Claim 5, Mori in view of Sumino discloses, the operation member according to claim 1, and Mori further discloses on Fig. 8, wherein: the first magnetic portion (magnet 112) is flush with the outer peripheral surface of the stationary frame (magnet 112 is flush with peripheral protrusion of barrel 110); and the second magnetic portion (magnet 42 and 32) is flush with the end face of the end face-contact portion (magnets 42 and 32 don’t protrude from the outer periphery of rings 40 and 30).
Re Claim 6, Mori in view of Sumino discloses, the operation member according to claim 1, and Mori further discloses on Fig. 6, wherein the stationary frame (lens barrel 110) constitutes a lens barrel body of a lens barrel (lens barrel 110 is a lens barrel body) [Par 59].
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Oishi (US 20080094488 A1) teaches a magnetic lens barrel body.
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 RAY ALEXANDER DEAN whose telephone number is (571)272-4027. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30-5:00.
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.
/RAY ALEXANDER DEAN/ Examiner, Art Unit 2872
/BUMSUK WON/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Prosecution Insights