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 of Claims
In the present application, claim 1-18 are currently pending and examined below.
Claim Objections
Claims 6, 11, 12, and 13 objected to because of the following informalities:
Claims 6, 11, 12, and 13 all use the language “when seen” in lines, 4, 1, 9, and 1, respectively. Such language is used in relation to a previously introduced direction. However such language is confusing and cumbersome. It is unclear whether the language is introducing a step a user must perform when using the device – endoscope – (i.e. user must perform a step of placing the device first in a specific orientation), which could be interpreted as requiring a method step in a device claim and render the claim indefinite under MPEP 2173.05(p)(II). Such language could also be interpreted as merely language referring to a reference point because such language is used in conjunction with a previously introduced direction. Examiner is interpreting the language as the later. Therefore, it is suggested to omit the language “when seen” from the each of the respective claims to omit confusion and clarify Applicant’s intention.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
Heat transfer member of claim 17, which has support in the specification in the following paragraphs stating:
[0019] “As shown in FIG. 2, the optical unit 18 is disposed inside the tip end portion 11. The optical unit 18 forms an optical image of the subject, converts the optical image of the subject into an image signal, and transmits the image signal to the processor 3. The optical unit 18 includes an objective lens unit 20, a heat dissipation member 25, an imaging unit 30, and heat transfer members 38a and 38b. That is, the endoscope 2 includes the heat dissipation member 25, the imaging unit 30, and the heat transfer members 38a and 38b.”
[0039] “Each of the heat transfer members 38a and 38b dissipates heat generated in the imaging element 32. Each of the heat transfer members 38a and 38b is disposed closer to the base end side (the -Z side) than the imaging element 32. Each of the heat transfer members 38a and 38b is made of a metal such as aluminum, copper, or the like. Each of the heat transfer members 38a and 38b has a higher thermal conductivity than the imaging element holding part 31. The heat transfer member 38a is in contact with the first imaging element 32a. The heat transfer member 38b is in contact with the second imaging element 32b. In other words, the heat transfer members 38a and 38b are in contact with the imaging unit 30. Heat generated in each of the imaging elements 32a and 32b is transferred to the heat transfer members 38a and 38b and dissipated into the atmosphere inside the tip end portion 11. Each of the heat transfer members 38a and 38b may be connected to the tip end portion 11 via a heat transfer member made of, for example, a metal. In this case, since the heat generated in each of the imaging elements 32a and 32b can be dissipated to the outside of the endoscope 2 via the heat transfer members 38a and 38b, the heat transfer member, and the tip end portion 11, it is possible to more effectively limit temperatures of the imaging elements 32a and 32b from becoming too high.”
[0116-0117] “As shown in FIG. 13, the heat transfer member 687a is a leaf spring that extends from the heat dissipation member 325 toward the tip end portion 11. The heat transfer member 687a is made of a metal.”
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 2-6, and 9-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 2 recites the limitation “the imaging unit has at least one imaging element” in line 4. However, claim 1 line 4, which claim 2 directly depends from, introduces the limitation “an imaging unit having an imaging element.” Therefore it is unclear whether the limitation of “the imaging unit has at least one imaging element” in claim 2 is referencing the same “imaging unit having an imaging element” previously introduced in claim 1 or introducing a new distinct “imaging element” separate from the “at least one imaging element” previously introduced. Examiner is interpreting the limitation in claim 2 in reference to “the imaging unit having the imaging element” of claim 1. Therefore, it is suggested to omit the limitation in claim 2. Claim 3 is also rejected because of its dependency on the rejected claim 2. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "the first lens frame" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is suggested to amend claim 4 to depend from claim 2. Claim 5 is also rejected because of its dependency on the rejected claim 4. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "the second lens frame" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is suggested to amend claim 4 to depend from claim 2. Claim 5 is also rejected because of its dependency on the rejected claim 4. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 6 recites the limitation "the first lens frame" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is suggested to amend claim 6 to depend from claim 2. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 6 recites the limitation "the second lens frame" in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is suggested to amend claim 6 to depend from claim 2. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 9 recites the limitation "the first lens frame" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is suggested to amend claim 9 to depend from claim 2. Claims 10-16 are also rejected because of their direct or indirect dependency on rejected claim 9. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 9 recites the limitation "the second lens frame" in lines 3-4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is suggested to amend claim 9 to depend from claim 2. Claims 10-16 are also rejected because of their direct or indirect dependency on rejected claim 9. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 11 recites the term “substantially” in line 2, which is a relative term and renders the claim indefinite. The term “substantially” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Therefore, it is unclear as to what degree the triangular shape of the contact portion entails. It is suggested to omit the term. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 12 recites the term “substantially” in line 10, which is a relative term and renders the claim indefinite. The term “substantially” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Therefore, it is unclear as to what degree the triangular shape of the contact portion entails. It is suggested to omit the term. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by Hirofumi et al. (JPH09265047) hereinafter Hirofumi.
Regarding Claim 1, Hirofumi discloses an endoscope (Fig. 1 endoscope 1) comprising:
a lens frame (Fig. 7 metal case 18e) configured to hold each of a first objective optical system (Fig. 7 right eye, [0058-0062] [0031], see annotated Fig. 7) and a second objective optical system (Fig. 7 left eye, [0058-0062] [0031], see annotated Fig. 7) and to extend in an optical axis direction (see annotated Fig. 1 and 7);
an imaging unit (Fig. 7 objective lens 17R and right-eye CCD chip 18d(R) and objective lens 17L and left-eye CCD chip 18d(L)) having an imaging element (Fig. 7 right-eye CCD chip 18d(R) and left-eye CCD chip 18d(L)); and
a heat dissipation member (Fig. 7 partition plate 18f) in contact with each of the lens frame (Fig. 7 metal case 18e) and the imaging unit (Fig. 7 objective lens 17R and right-eye CCD chip 18d(R) and objective lens 17L and left-eye CCD chip 18d(L)).
PNG
media_image1.png
315
595
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
784
752
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 2, Hirofumi discloses the endoscope according to claim 1, wherein the lens frame (Fig. 7 metal case 18e) includes a first lens frame (Fig. 7 portion of case 18e that holds objective lens 17R and CCD 18R) that holds the first objective optical system (see annotated Fig. 7), and a second lens frame (Fig. 7 portion of case 18e that holds objective lens 17Land CCD 18L) that holds the second objective optical system (see annotated Fig. 7),
the (Fig. 7 objective lens 17R and right-eye CCD chip 18d(R) and objective lens 17L and left-eye CCD chip 18d(L)) has at least one imaging element (Fig. 7 right-eye CCD chip 18d(R) and left-eye CCD chip 18d(L)), and
at least a part of the heat dissipation member (Fig. 7 partition plate 18f) is disposed between the first lens frame (Fig. 7 portion of case 18e that holds objective lens 17R and CCD 18R) and the second lens frame (Fig. 7 portion of case 18e that holds objective lens 17Land CCD 18L) and is in contact with at least one of the first lens frame (Fig. 7 portion of case 18e that holds objective lens 17R and CCD 18R) and the second lens frame (Fig. 7 portion of case 18e that holds objective lens 17Land CCD 18L).
PNG
media_image1.png
315
595
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 3. Hirofumi discloses the endoscope according to claim 2, wherein the heat dissipation member (Fig. 7 partition plate 18f) is in contact with both the first lens frame (Fig. 7 portion of case 18e that holds objective lens 17R and CCD 18R) and the second lens frame (Fig. 7 portion of case 18e that holds objective lens 17Land CCD 18L).
Regarding Claim 4. Hirofumi discloses the endoscope according to claim 1, further comprising a holding frame (Fig. 2 inner cylinder 14) configured to accommodate the first lens frame (Fig. 7 portion of case 18e that holds objective lens 17R and CCD 18R), the second lens frame (Fig. 7 portion of case 18e that holds objective lens 17Land CCD 18L), and the imaging unit (Fig. 7 objective lens 17R and right-eye CCD chip 18d(R) and objective lens 17L and left-eye CCD chip 18d(L)), wherein the heat dissipation member (Fig. 7 partition plate 18f) and the holding frame are different members (Fig. 2 inner cylinder 14).
Regarding Claim 5. Hirofumi discloses the endoscope according to claim 4, wherein a thermal conductivity of the heat dissipation member (Fig. 7 partition plate 18f) is greater than ([0089] “…18e metal case 18f bulkhead plate…”) [0035] “ …14a insulating film portion of the inner cylinder 14…”) ,a thermal conductivity of the holding frame (Fig. 2 inner cylinder 14).
Regarding Claim 6. Hirofumi discloses the endoscope according to claim 1, wherein the first lens frame (Fig. 7 portion of case 18e that holds objective lens 17R and CCD 18R) and the second lens frame (Fig. 7 portion of case 18e that holds objective lens 17Land CCD 18L) are disposed with an interval therebetween in a first direction (see annotated Fig. 1 and 7) intersecting the optical axis direction (see annotated Fig. 1 and 7), and when seen in the first direction (see annotated Fig. 1 and 7), at least a part of the heat dissipation member (Fig. 7 partition plate 18f) overlaps each of the first lens frame (Fig. 7 portion of case 18e that holds objective lens 17R and CCD 18R) and the second lens frame (Fig. 7 portion of case 18e that holds objective lens 17Land CCD 18L)
PNG
media_image3.png
784
752
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 7. Hirofumi discloses the endoscope according to claim 1, wherein the imaging unit (Fig. 7 objective lens 17R and right-eye CCD chip 18d(R) and objective lens 17L and left-eye CCD chip 18d(L)) has an imaging element holding part (Fig. 7 IR filter 18c) that holds the imaging element (Fig. 7 objective lens 17R and right-eye CCD chip 18d(R) and objective lens 17L and left-eye CCD chip 18d(L)), the imaging element holding part (Fig. 7 IR filter 18c) is made of a resin, and the heat dissipation member (Fig. 7 partition plate 18f) is in contact with the imaging element holding part(Fig. 7 IR filter 18c).
Regarding Claim 8, Hirofumi discloses the endoscope according to claim 1, further comprising a heat transfer member (Fig. 7 lens barrel 17b) disposed closer to a base end side (Fig. 7 near reference numeral 17L) than the imaging element (Fig. 7 right-eye CCD chip 18d(R) and left-eye CCD chip 18d(L)), wherein the heat transfer member (Fig. 7 lens barrel 17b) is in contact with the imaging unit (Fig. 7 objective lens 17R and right-eye CCD chip 18d(R) and objective lens 17L and left-eye CCD chip 18d(L)).
Regarding Claim 9, Hirofumi discloses the endoscope according to claim 1, wherein the heat dissipation member (Fig. 7 partition plate 18f) has a contact portion (see annotated Fig. 7) that is in contact with the lens frame (Fig. 7 metal case 18e), a straight line (see annotated Fig. 7) that intersects a central axis (see annotated Fig. 7) of each of the first lens frame (Fig. 7 portion of case 18e that holds objective lens 17R and CCD 18R) and the second lens frame Fig. 7 portion of case 18e that holds objective lens 17Land CCD 18L) and that extends in a first direction (see annotated Fig. 7) intersecting the optical axis direction (see annotated Fig. 7) is defined as a first virtual line (see annotated Fig. 7), and in a second direction (If the optical axis direction and the central axis direction are along an x-axis, and the first direction is along a y-axis, then the second direction would be along the z-axis in a Cartesian coordinate system, wherein the second direction is identified by the circle and labeled contact portion in annotated Fig. 7.) that is a direction perpendicular to both the optical axis direction (see annotated Fig. 7) and the first direction (see annotated Fig. 7), a dimension of a portion of the contact portion (see annotated Fig. 7) in the first direction (see annotated Fig. 7) that is farthest from the first virtual line (see annotated Fig. 7) in the second direction (see annotated Fig. 7) is larger than a dimension of a portion of the contact portion (see annotated Fig. 7) in the first direction (see annotated Fig. 7) that is closest to the first virtual line (see annotated Fig. 7).
PNG
media_image4.png
331
826
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 10, Hirofumi discloses the endoscope according to claim 9, wherein the contact portion (see annotated Fig. 7) has a first portion that extends in the second direction (If the optical axis direction and the central axis direction are along an x-axis, and the first direction is along a y-axis, then the second direction would be along the z-axis in a Cartesian coordinate system, wherein the second direction is identified by the circle and labeled contact portion in annotated Fig. 7.) and second portions that extend in the first direction (see annotated Fig. 7) from both ends of the first portion in the second direction (If the optical axis direction and the central axis direction are along an x-axis, and the first direction is along a y-axis, then the second direction would be along the z-axis in a Cartesian coordinate system, wherein the second direction is identified by the circle and labeled contact portion in annotated Fig. 7.).
PNG
media_image5.png
331
826
media_image5.png
Greyscale
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 11-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hirofumi in view of M. Ahmadian-Elmi et al. Optical Design and Placement of Heat Sink Elements Attached on a Cylindrical Heat-Generating Body for Maximum Cooling Performance. Elsevier. Science Direct. 2021., hereinafter Ahmadian-Elmi.
Regarding Claim 11, Hirofumi discloses the endoscope according to claim 9 but is silent as to wherein when seen in the optical axis direction, the contact portion has a substantially triangular shape that protrudes toward the first virtual line.
However Ahmadian-Elmi, in the same field of endeavor, teaches when seen in the optical axis direction, the contact portion has a substantially triangular shape that protrudes toward the first virtual line (Ahmadian-Elmi – Abstract “The purpose of this study is to reduce the highest temperature of a cylindrical heat-generating body by geometric design of heat sink attachments on the device’s top surface. Six configurations are proposed for the shape of the heat sinks. For a fixed total area of the heat sink attachments, it is proven that there exist optimal configurations, locations and geometric parameters of the heat sink attachments that thermally perform the best among the others. Found to yield the best cooling performance, the ‘semi-triangular-shaped’ heat sinks reduce the highest temperature of the hot medium around 60 % more than the circular-shaped heat sinks.”)
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Hirofumi with the teachings of Ahmadian-Elmi to ensure that when seen in the optical axis direction, the contact portion has a substantially triangular shape that protrudes toward the first virtual line for the benefit of having a good cooling performance and heat dissipation.
Regarding Claim 12, Hirofumi discloses the endoscope according to claim 9 but is silent as to wherein the heat dissipation member includes a first heat dissipation member disposed closer to a first side in the second direction than the first virtual line, and a second heat dissipation member disposed closer to a second side in the second direction than the first virtual line, the first heat dissipation member has a first contact portion that is in contact with the lens frame, the second heat dissipation member has a second contact portion that is in contact with the lens frame, and when seen in the optical axis direction, each of the first contact portion and the second contact portion has a substantially triangular shape that protrudes toward the first virtual line.
However Ahmadian-Elmi, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the heat dissipation member includes a first heat dissipation member disposed closer to a first side in the second direction than the first virtual line, and a second heat dissipation member disposed closer to a second side in the second direction than the first virtual line, the first heat dissipation member has a first contact portion that is in contact with the lens frame, the second heat dissipation member has a second contact portion that is in contact with the lens frame, and when seen in the optical axis direction, each of the first contact portion and the second contact portion has a substantially triangular shape that protrudes toward the first virtual line (Ahmadian-Elmi – Fig. 2, Abstract “The purpose of this study is to reduce the highest temperature of a cylindrical heat-generating body by geometric design of heat sink attachments on the device’s top surface. Six configurations are proposed for the shape of the heat sinks. For a fixed total area of the heat sink attachments, it is proven that there exist optimal configurations, locations and geometric parameters of the heat sink attachments that thermally perform the best among the others. Found to yield the best cooling performance, the ‘semi-triangular-shaped’ heat sinks reduce the highest temperature of the hot medium around 60 % more than the circular-shaped heat sinks.”, Page 8-9 Section “Results and discussion” Fig. 9.).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Hirofumi with the teachings of Ahmadian-Elmi to ensure wherein the heat dissipation member includes a first heat dissipation member disposed closer to a first side in the second direction than the first virtual line, and a second heat dissipation member disposed closer to a second side in the second direction than the first virtual line, the first heat dissipation member has a first contact portion that is in contact with the lens frame, the second heat dissipation member has a second contact portion that is in contact with the lens frame, and when seen in the optical axis direction, each of the first contact portion and the second contact portion has a substantially triangular shape that protrudes toward the first virtual line for the benefit of having a good cooling performance and heat dissipation.
Regarding Claim 13, Hirofumi discloses the endoscope according to claim 9 but is silent as to wherein when seen in the optical axis direction, the contact portion has a V-shape that widens in the first direction as it moves away from the first virtual line in the second direction.
However Ahmadian-Elmi, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein when seen in the optical axis direction, the contact portion has a V-shape that widens in the first direction as it moves away from the first virtual line in the second direction (Ahmadian-Elmi – Fig. 2, Abstract “The purpose of this study is to reduce the highest temperature of a cylindrical heat-generating body by geometric design of heat sink attachments on the device’s top surface. Six configurations are proposed for the shape of the heat sinks. For a fixed total area of the heat sink attachments, it is proven that there exist optimal configurations, locations and geometric parameters of the heat sink attachments that thermally perform the best among the others. Found to yield the best cooling performance, the ‘semi-triangular-shaped’ heat sinks reduce the highest temperature of the hot medium around 60 % more than the circular-shaped heat sinks.”, Page 8-9 Section “Results and discussion” Fig. 9.).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Hirofumi with the teachings of Ahmadian-Elmi to ensure wherein when seen in the optical axis direction, the contact portion has a V-shape that widens in the first direction as it moves away from the first virtual line in the second direction for the benefit of having a good cooling performance and heat dissipation.
Claim 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hirofumi in view of Kenji Kimura (US4846155) hereinafter Kimura.
Regarding Claim 14, Hirofumi discloses the endoscope according to claim 9, wherein the first lens frame (Fig. 7 portion of case 18e that holds objective lens 17R and CCD 18R) has a first moving frame that is movable in the optical axis direction, and a first holding portion that movably holds the first moving frame (([0046-0050]) “[0046] Next, mounting the objective lens 17 with reference to the position of the CCD module 18. Hole 21a for inserting implement left-eye objective lens 17L is intended subjected to precisely machined to the reference position of the left-eye objective lens 17L is aligned with the reference position of the left-eye CCD module 18L Yes, it can be inserted into the objective lens 17L is for the left eye, and, keep the necessary minimum of clearance that can be moved smoothly. Since the left-eye objective lens 17L which is movable in the optical axis direction, positioned where focused while reflects an image on the monitor 7, is fixed with screws or adhesive. [0056] “[0056] First, in the same manner as Example 3, performed to implementation and, of the left-eye objective lens 17L which is a reference implementation of the CCD 18. Then, the objective lens 17R for the right eye by using an eccentric objective lens 17D, its implementation will be made in the following procedure. Unlike Example 3, the hole portion 21b for inserting the objective lens 17R for the right eye implementations, the machining so that the reference position of the objective lens 17R for the right eye is aligned with the reference position of the right-eye CCD18L are those subjected, keep the minimum required clearance objective lens 17R is for the right eye may be inserted. Since the right-eye objective lens 17R is movable in the optical axis direction, to position the optical axis direction where focused while reflects an image on the monitor 7. Also, using eccentric objective lens 17D objective lens 17R for the right eye, since the optical axes Ol of the objective lens 17a is shifted from the central axis Ot of the barrel 17b, by rotating the objective lens 17R for the right eye since the image is moved vertically and horizontally, vertically while watching the image for the left eye that is displayed on the monitor 7, the lateral direction, and performs positioning in the rotation direction, is fixed with screws or adhesive.”) , the second lens frame (Fig. 7 portion of case 18e that holds objective lens 17Land CCD 18L) has a second moving frame that is movable in the optical axis direction, and a second holding portion that movably holds the second moving frame ([0046-0050]), but is silent at whether each of the first moving frame and the second moving frame holds at least one lens, a magnet is mounted in each of the first moving frame and the second moving frame, a coil is mounted on each of the first holding portion and the second holding portion, and each of the first moving frame and the second moving frame moves in the optical axis direction by passing a current through the coil.
However Kimura, in the same field of endeavor, teaches each of the first moving frame (Kimura – Fig. 10 wall 77) and the second moving frame (Kimura – Fig. 10 wall 77) holds at least one lens (Kimura – Fig. 10 objective lens 74), a magnet (Kimura – Fig. 10 magnet 83) is mounted in each of the first moving frame (Kimura – Fig. 10 wall 77) and the second moving frame (Kimura – Fig. 10 wall 77), a coil (Kimura – Fig. 10 coil 82) is mounted on each of the first holding portion and the second holding portion, and each of the first moving frame (Kimura – Fig. 10 wall 77) and the second moving frame (Kimura – Fig. 10 wall 77) moves in the optical axis direction by passing a current through the coil (Kimura – [col. 7 line 53 – col. 8 line 13] “FIG. 10 is a schematic view showing the construction of a second embodiment of the system for driving the CCD, and FIG. 11 is a perspective view showing a major part of said system. In the first embodiment, the CCD 11 is vibrated by the piezoelectric element 26. But in this second embodiment, a distal end portion 72 of a video endoscope 71 is formed in a cylindrical body and comprises an objective 74 arranged on the front end thereof, and a CCD 75 secured to a movable member 76 in the vicinity of a focal plane of the objective forming an optical image of an object 73. A concave portion is formed in the front end surface of the movable member 76 and the CCD 75 is fixed into the concave portion by adhesive agent. On the rear end surface of this movable member 76, slidable shafts 79, 79 and a yoke 81 are provided, the shafts being passed through holes 78, 78 which are formed in a ring-shaped wall 77, and the yoke being provided at the center position of the rear surface of the movable member. A coil 82 is wound around the yoke 81, and the assembly of the yoke 81 and coil 82 is passed through a center hole of a ring-shaped permanent magnet 83 which is secured to the inner wall of the ring-shaped wall 77. The ring-shaped magnet 83 is polarized in the radial direction as shown in FIG. 11. In this manner, the driving system using the moving coil is composed. Then, the force for moving the movable member 76 into the direction of the optical axis of the objective 74 is generated in accordance with the direction of the electric current supplied to the coil 82.Thus, in the second embodiment, the automatic focus control is realized by supplying the composite signal of the vibration signal and the focus error correction signal to the moving coil 82. In this embodiment, a current amplifier is used instead of the voltage amplifier. It should be noted that in FIG. 10, the light guide is omitted for the sake of simplicity.”)
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Hirofumi with the teachings of Kimura to include each of the first moving frame and the second moving frame holds at least one lens, a magnet is mounted in each of the first moving frame and the second moving frame, a coil is mounted on each of the first holding portion and the second holding portion, and each of the first moving frame and the second moving frame moves in the optical axis direction by passing a current through the coil for the benefit of “driving the CCD …[in a] system where the coil is composed …[and]…the force used for moving each frame is generated in accordance with the direction of the electrical current supplied to the coil…[and]… automatic focus control is realized (Kimura – [col. 7 line 53 – col. 8 line 21]).
Regarding Claim 15, Hirofumi discloses the endoscope according to claim 14, wherein the heat dissipation member (Hirofumi - Fig. 7 partition plate 18f) is made of a magnetic material (Hirofumi - 18e is a metal case, 18f is a partition plate of the metal case 18e, metal is a magnetic material).
Regarding Claim 16, Hirofumi in view of Kimura teach the endoscope according to claim 14, wherein the heat dissipation member (Hirofumi - Fig. 7 partition plate 18f) is disposed on only a first side (Hirofumi – near the circle identified as contract portion in annotated Fig. 7) in the second direction (Hirofumi - If the optical axis direction and the central axis direction are along an x-axis, and the first direction is along a y-axis, then the second direction would be along the z-axis in a Cartesian coordinate system, wherein the second direction is identified by the circle and labeled contact portion in annotated Fig. 7.) with respect to the first virtual line (Hirofumi – seen annotated Fig. 7).
PNG
media_image5.png
331
826
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Claims 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hirofumi in view of Aoki et al. (US2018/0263477) hereinafter Aoki.
Regarding Claim 17, Hirofumi discloses the endoscope according to claim 1, but is silent as to further comprising a heat-conducted member and a heat transfer member configured to connect the heat dissipation member and the heat conductive member.
However Aoki, in the same field of endeavor, teaches further comprising a heat-conducted member (Aoki – Fig. 1d camera unit 11) and a heat transfer member (Examiner’s Note: As stated above heat transfer member is being interpreted as a spring. Here Aoki teaches a heat transfer member as metal spring (ground unit) 191) configured to connect (Aoki – [0046-0057, 0068]) the heat dissipation member (Aoki - Fig. 1d support-tube joining unit 14) and the heat conductive member (Aoki – Fig. 1d camera unit 11).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Hirofumi with the teachings of Aoki to further teach comprising a heat-conducted member and a heat transfer member configured to connect the heat dissipation member and the heat conductive member for the benefit of grounding the electrical noise from the camera and “…prevent mixing of a high-frequency noise” from a tool such as an electric knife, and possibly “…prevent a situation in which an image is disturbed or displaying of an image is stopped by inputting the high-frequency noise to the camera unit” (Aoki- [0068]).
Regarding Claim 18, Hirofumi discloses the endoscope according to claim 1, but is silent as to explicitly state wherein an end portion of the heat dissipation member on an object side is exposed to an outside of the endoscope, and the heat dissipation member is grounded.
However Aoki, in the same field of endeavor teaches wherein an end portion (Aoki – portion of unit 14 touching camera unit 11) of the heat dissipation member (Aoki - Fig. 1d support-tube joining unit 14) on an object side (Fig. 2 inside of body) is exposed to an outside of the endoscope (Fig. 2 camera support tube 13), and the heat dissipation member (Aoki - Fig. 1d support-tube joining unit 14) is grounded ([0068] “Specifically, in FIG. 1(d), the heat-conductive protrusion portion 14 d which is in contact with the camera support tube 13 penetrates the bottom portion of the support-tube joining unit 14, and is brought into contact with the metal spring 191. Here, since the circuit board 19 is grounded, the high-frequency noise flows to the electrical ground from the camera support tube 13 via the metal spring 191, the heat-conductive protrusion portion 14 d, and the circuit board 19. Accordingly, it is possible to prevent mixing of a high-frequency noise from the electric knife into a signal passing in the camera-side cable 12, and it is possible to prevent a situation in which an image is disturbed or displaying of an image is stopped by inputting the high-frequency noise to the camera unit control device 17.”).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Hirofumi with the teachings of Aoki to include wherein an end portion of the heat dissipation member on an object side is exposed to an outside of the endoscope, and the heat dissipation member is grounded for the benefit of preventing “…a situation in which an image is disturbed” because high frequency noise is prevented from interfering with the camera (Aoki – [0068]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MEGAN E MONAHAN whose telephone number is (571)272-7330. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8am - 5pm.
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, Michael Carey can be reached at (571) 270-7235. 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.
/MEGAN ELIZABETH MONAHAN/ Examiner, Art Unit 3795