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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
Acknowledgement is made of receipt of Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO-1449) filed 07/12/2024 and 07/24/2025. An initialed copy is attached to this Office Action.
Claim Objections
The claims are objected to because the lines are crowded too closely together, making reading difficult. Substitute claims with lines one and one-half or double spaced on good quality paper are required. See 37 CFR 1.52(b).
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 1-5, 9-12, 18 and 19 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-5 of U.S. Patent No. 12,066,688 in view of Ryoo et al., (hereafter Ryoo) (US 2020/0393637 A1).
With respect to Claim 1, U.S. Patent No. 12,066,688 teach the
following claim limitations:
Application 18/770,920
U.S. Patent No. 12,066,688
Claim 1:
An optical element drive mechanism, comprising:
an immovable part;
a movable part connected to an optical element that has an optical axis, wherein the movable part is movable relative to the immovable part;
a drive assembly driving the movable part to move relative to the immovable part, wherein the drive assembly comprises:
a piezoelectric element comprising a piezoelectric material, wherein the piezoelectric element generates a driving force;
a transmission element extending in a first direction, wherein the transmission element transmits the driving force;
a contact element in direct contact with the transmission element; and
a compression element for generating a compression force, so that the contact element is in contact with the transmission element, wherein the compression element has
a compression-element opening corresponding to the contact element, and the contact element is received in the compression-element opening,
wherein the driving force is transmitted to the contact element by the transmission element, and the compression element thereby drives the movable part to move relative to the immovable part in the first direction
Claim 1:
An optical element drive mechanism, comprising:
an immovable part;
a movable part connected to an optical element that has an optical axis, wherein the movable part is movable relative to the immovable part; and
a drive assembly driving the movable part to move relative to the immovable part, wherein the drive assembly comprises:
a piezoelectric element comprising a piezoelectric material, wherein the piezoelectric element generates a driving force: a resilient element disposed on the piezoelectric element;
a transmission element extending in a first direction, wherein the transmission element transmits the driving force;
a contact element in direct contact with the transmission element; and
a compression element for generating a compression force, so that the contact element is in contact with the transmission element, wherein the compression element has
a compression-element opening corresponding to the contact element, and the contact element is received in the compression-element opening;
wherein the driving force is transmitted to the contact element by the transmission element, and the compression element thereby drives the movable part to move relative to the immovable part in the first direction.
With respect to Claim 1, U.S. Patent No. 12,066,688 fails to teach a sensing assembly sensing the movement of the movable part. U.S. Patent No. 12,066,688 and Ryoo are related as optical drive mechanisms. Ryoo teaches a sensing assembly (position sensing assembly 6-600, Figure 60) sensing the movement of the movable part (position sensing assembly 6-600, Figure 60, may be disposed in the first optical module 6-3 to detect the movement of the movable portion 6-200, ¶[0299]).It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the optical system as claimed by U.S. Patent No. 12,066,688 having the optical element drive mechanism with the teachings of Ryoo having a sensing assembly sensing the movement of the movable part for the purpose of detecting the amount of displacement of the optical elements to perform optical image stabilization, ¶[0299].
Application 18/770,920
U.S. Patent No. 12,066,688
Claim 2
Claim 2
Claim 3:
The optical element drive mechanism as claimed in claim 2, further comprising a dust-proof element disposed on the immovable part or the movable part, wherein the dust-proof element comprises an adhesive material.
Claim 3:
The optical element drive mechanism as claimed in claim 2, further comprising a dust-proof element disposed on the immovable part or the movable part, wherein the dust-proof element is used to restrict movement of a particle.
Claim 4:
The optical element drive mechanism as claimed in claim 3,
wherein when viewed from the first direction, the dust-proof element at least partially overlaps the piezoelectric element.
Claim 5:
The optical element drive mechanism as claimed in claim 4, wherein when viewed from the first direction, there
is a space between the transmission element and the contact element, and the dust-proof element at least partially overlaps the space,
wherein when viewed from the first direction, the dust-proof element at least partially overlaps the piezoelectric element.
Claim 5:
The optical element drive mechanism as claimed in claim 3, wherein when viewed from the first direction, the transmission element is surrounded by the dust-proof element, and there is a first space between the dust-proof element and the transmission element to prevent the dust-proof element from coming into contact with the transmission element.
Claim 4:
The optical element drive mechanism as claimed in claim 3, wherein when viewed from the first direction, the transmission element is surrounded by the dust-proof element, and there is a first distance between the dust-proof element and the transmission element to prevent the dustproof element from coming into contact with the transmission element.
With respect to Claim 9, U.S. Patent No. 12,066,688 fails to teach a guidance assembly in contact with the movable part. U.S. Patent No. 12,066,688 and Ryoo are related as optical drive mechanisms. Ryoo teaches a guidance assembly (2-500, Figure 9) in contact with the movable part (2-200, Figure 9) and the immovable part (2-100, Figure 9) to guide the movable part (2-200, Figure 9) to move relative to the immovable part (2-100, Figure 9) in the first direction (2-D1, Figure 9). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the optical system as claimed by U.S. Patent No. 12,066,688 having the optical element drive mechanism with the teachings of Ryoo having a guidance assembly for the purpose of preventing the movable part from separating from other optical elements, ¶[0159].
With respect to Claim 10, U.S. Patent No. 12,066,688 fails to teach wherein when viewed from the first direction, the immovable part is polygonal, and the drive assembly and the guidance assembly are disposed on different corners of the immovable part, respectively. U.S. Patent No. 12,066,688 and Ryoo are related as optical drive mechanisms. Ryoo teaches wherein when viewed from the first direction (2-D1, Figure 9), the immovable part (2-100, Figure 9) is polygonal, and the drive assembly (2-100, Figure 9) and the guidance assembly (2-500, Figure 9) are disposed on different corners (see Figure 9) of the immovable part (2-100, Figure 9), respectively. It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the optical system as claimed by U.S. Patent No. 12,066,688 having the optical element drive mechanism with the teachings of Ryoo having the immovable part is polygonal, and the drive assembly and the guidance assembly are disposed on different corners of the immovable part, respectively, for the purpose of stability and support of the movable part and other optical elements.
With respect to Claim 11, U.S. Patent No. 12,066,688 fails to teach wherein the guidance assembly comprises a guidance element and a guidance plate connected to the guidance element, the guidance element has a rod structure extending in the first direction, and the guidance plate has a plate-like structure. U.S. Patent No. 12,066,688 and Ryoo are related as optical drive mechanisms. Ryoo teaches wherein the guidance assembly (2-500, Figure 9) comprises a guidance element (one of 2-500, Figure 9) and a guidance plate (2-310, Figure 9) connected to the guidance element (one of 2-500, Figure 9), the guidance element (one of 2-500, Figure 9) has a rod structure (see Figure 9) extending in the first direction (2-D1, Figure 9), and the guidance plate (2-310, Figure 9) has a plate-like structure (see Figure 9). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the optical system as claimed by U.S. Patent No. 12,066,688 having the optical element drive mechanism with the teachings of Ryoo having the guidance assembly comprises a guidance element and a guidance plate connected to the guidance element, the guidance element has a rod structure extending in the first direction, and the guidance plate has a plate-like structure for the purpose of stability and support of the movable part and other optical elements.
With respect to Claim 12, U.S. Patent No. 12,066,688 fails to teach wherein the immovable part comprises a case, a base plate connected to the case, and a bottom disposed between the case and the base plate, and when viewed from a direction that is perpendicular to the first direction, the guidance plate is located between the bottom and the base plate. U.S. Patent No. 12,066,688 and Ryoo are related as optical drive mechanisms. Ryoo teaches the optical element drive mechanism as claimed in claim 11, wherein the immovable part (2-100, Figure 9) comprises a case, a base plate (2-120, Figure 9) connected to the case, and a bottom (2-120B, Figure 9) disposed between the case and the base plate (2-120, Figure 9), and when viewed from a direction (2-D2, Figure 9) that is perpendicular to the first direction (2-D1, Figure 9), the guidance plate (2-310, Figure 9) is located between the bottom (2-120B, Figure 9) and the base plate (2-120, Figure 9). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the optical system as claimed by U.S. Patent No. 12,066,688 having the optical element drive mechanism with the teachings of Ryoo having the immovable part comprises a case, a base plate connected to the case, and a bottom disposed between the case and the base plate, and when viewed from a direction that is perpendicular to the first direction, the guidance plate is located between the bottom and the base plate for the purpose of stability and support of the optical elements within the drive mechanism.
With respect to Claim 18, U.S. Patent No. 12,066,688 fails to teach wherein the drive assembly further comprises another piezoelectric element with substantially the same structure as the piezoelectric element. U.S. Patent No. 12,066,688 and Ryoo are related as optical drive mechanisms. Ryoo teaches wherein the drive assembly (4-42, Figure 31) further comprises another piezoelectric element (plurality of elements 4-421, Figure 31, ¶[0194]) with substantially the same structure as the piezoelectric element (one of the elements 4-421, Figure 31, ¶[0194]). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the optical system as claimed by U.S. Patent No. 12,066,688 having the optical element drive mechanism with the teachings of Ryoo having the drive assembly further comprises another piezoelectric element with substantially the same structure as the piezoelectric element for the purpose of having, electrical energy convert into mechanical energy for the driving element to be elongated, ¶[0195].
With respect to Claim 19, U.S. Patent No. 12,066,688 fails to teach wherein a portion of the immovable part that surrounds the transmission element comprises a concave structure. U.S. Patent No. 12,066,688 and Ryoo are related as optical drive mechanisms. Ryoo teaches the optical element drive mechanism as claimed in claim 1, wherein a portion of the immovable part (2-100, Figure 9) that surrounds the transmission element (2-320, Figure 14) comprises a concave structure (2-350, Figure 9). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the optical system as claimed by U.S. Patent No. 12,066,688 having the optical element drive mechanism with the teachings of Ryoo having a portion of the immovable part that surrounds the transmission element comprises a concave structure for the purpose of restricting the range of motion of optical elements, ¶[0152].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-8, 13-17 and 20 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.
With respect to Claim 2, the prior art fails to teach “wherein the movable part comprises a holder, and Young’s modulus of the holder is less than Young’s modulus of the compression element.”
With respect to claims 3-8, these claims depend on claim 2 and are allowable at least for the reasons stated supra.
With respect to Claim 13, the prior art fails to teach “a circuit assembly, wherein the circuit assembly comprises a circuit-assembly immovable portion that is parallel with the first direction and a circuit-assembly movable portion that is not parallel with the first direction, and the circuit-assembly movable portion is movable relative to the movable part and the immovable part.”
With respect to claims 14-17, these claims depend on claim 13 and are allowable at least for the reasons stated supra.
With respect to Claim 20, the prior art fails to teach “wherein the contact element comprises a plurality of metal pieces located on different sides of the compression-element opening.”
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TAMARA Y WASHINGTON whose telephone number is (571)270-3887. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thur 730-530 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, Stephone Allen can be reached on 571-272-2434. 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.
/TYW/Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2872
/STEPHONE B ALLEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2872