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 .
Drawings
The drawings filed on 10/10/2024 are acknowledged and accepted.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: “first and second rolling bearings” should read “a first and second rolling bearings”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1-4, 6-12, 14, and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Matsumoto (US20090128931A1, foreign equivalent CN101189542B cited in IDS dated 12/04/2024).
With respect to Claim 1, Matsumoto discloses a focusing system for an optical instrument such as a telescope (Fig. 1-- element 50, lens-barrel; [0068]), the focusing system comprising:
a first tube (Fig. 1-- element 52, movable lens-barrel; [0068]) that extends in a longitudinal direction;
a second tube (Fig. 1-- element 48, exterior lens-barrel; [0068]) that extends in the longitudinal direction, the second tube (Fig. 1-- element 48, exterior lens-barrel; [0068]) comprising a bore-defining surface shaped to define a bore that extends in the longitudinal direction wherein the first tube (Fig. 1-- element 52, movable lens-barrel; [0068]) extends into the bore;
an optical element ([0016]: element 52 contains a first lens) coupled to one of the first and second tubes (Fig. 1-- element 48, exterior lens-barrel; [0068]) for movement therewith;
an elastically deformable element (Fig. 1-- element 6B, leaf spring; [0035]) located between an outer surface of the first tube (Fig. 1-- element 52, movable lens-barrel; [0068]) and the bore-defining surface of the second tube (Fig. 1-- element 48, exterior lens-barrel; [0068]) and extending in the longitudinal direction (Fig. 1—element 6B is oriented along the optical axis and in between elements 52 and 48); and
first and second rolling bearings (Fig. 3—element 14, rollers; [0040]) supported at first and second longitudinally spaced apart sections (Fig. 3— the rollers are spaced across element 6B in the optical axis directions) of the elastically deformable element (Fig. 1-- element 6B, leaf spring; [0035]) for rolling movement while supported at the first and second sections, the first and second rolling bearings (Fig. 3—element 14, rollers; [0040]) in contact with the outer surface of the first tube (Fig. 1-- element 52, movable lens-barrel; [0068]);
wherein relative movement between the first and second tubes (Fig. 1-- element 48, exterior lens-barrel and element 52, movable lens-barrel; [0068]) in the longitudinal direction is facilitated by rolling movement ([0048]: element 14 allows for linear movement of the lens barrel) of the rolling bearings (Fig. 3—element 14, rollers; [0040]) along the outer surface of the first tube (Fig. 1-- element 52, movable lens-barrel; [0068]).
With respect to Claim 2, Matsumoto discloses the focusing system of claim 1, and further discloses wherein the elastically deformable element (Fig. 1-- element 6B, leaf spring; [0035]) is deformed from its non-stressed state such that restorative forces associated with the deformation of the elastically deformable element (Fig. 1-- element 6B, leaf spring; [0035]) tend to force the rolling bearings (Fig. 3—element 14, rollers; [0040]) into contact ([0049]: spring force is constantly applied to element 14) with the outer surface of the first tube (Fig. 1-- element 52, movable lens-barrel; [0068]).
With respect to Claim 3, Matsumoto discloses the focusing system of claim 1, and further discloses wherein the elastically deformable element (Fig. 1-- element 6B, leaf spring; [0035]) is deformable such that the first and second longitudinally spaced sections (Fig. 3— the rollers are spaced across element 6B in the optical axis directions) of the elastically deformable element (Fig. 1-- element 6B, leaf spring; [0035]) are displaceable in directions having directional components orthogonal to the longitudinal direction ([0049]: spring force is constantly applied upwards to element 14) (e.g. having components in radial directions of the second tube (Fig. 1-- element 48, exterior lens-barrel; [0068])).
With respect to Claim 4, Matsumoto discloses the focusing system of claim 3, and further discloses wherein the elastically deformable element (Fig. 1-- element 6B, leaf spring; [0035]) is deformed such that the first longitudinal section (Fig. 3-- element 6c, resilient portion; [0044]) of the elastically deformable element (Fig. 1-- element 6B, leaf spring; [0035]) has a first displacement in a first direction ([0049]: spring force is constantly applied upwards to element 14) having at least a component orthogonal to the longitudinal direction relative to a non-deformed state of the elastically deformable element (Fig. 1-- element 6B, leaf spring; [0035]) and the second longitudinal section (Fig. 3-- element 6a, supporting portion; [0044]) of the elastically deformable element (Fig. 1-- element 6B, leaf spring; [0035]) has a second displacement in a second direction ([0049]: spring force is constantly applied upwards to element 14) having at least a component orthogonal to the longitudinal direction relative to the non-deformed state of the elastically deformable element (Fig. 1-- element 6B, leaf spring; [0035]).
With respect to Claim 6, Matsumoto discloses the focusing system of claim 4, and further discloses wherein a magnitude of the first displacement is the same as a magnitude of the second displacement ([0049]: spring force may be constantly applied to element 5).
With respect to Claim 7, Matsumoto discloses the focusing system of claim 1, and further discloses comprising one or more shafts (Fig. 3-- element 22, fitting pins; [0041]), the one or more shafts (Fig. 3-- element 22, fitting pins; [0041]) extending between, and connected to, the elastically deformable element (Fig. 1-- element 6B, leaf spring; [0035]) and the second tube (Fig. 1-- element 48, exterior lens-barrel; [0068]) to couple the elastically deformable element (Fig. 1-- element 6B, leaf spring; [0035]) to the second tube (Fig. 1-- element 48, exterior lens-barrel; [0068]) (Fig. 3—element 222 extends between elements 6B and 3).
With respect to Claim 8, Matsumoto discloses the focusing system of claim 7, and further discloses wherein the elastically deformable element (Fig. 1-- element 6B, leaf spring; [0035]) is shaped to define one or more holes (Fig. 3-- element 24, escape holes; [0041]) at locations between the first and second sections (Fig. 3-- element 6c, resilient portion; [0044] and second longitudinal section), the one or more shafts (Fig. 3-- element 22, fitting pins; [0041]) extending through corresponding ones of the one or more holes (Fig. 3-- element 24, escape holes; [0041]) in directions having directional components orthogonal to the longitudinal direction (Fig. 3—element 22 extends through element 24 in a direction perpendicular to the optical axis).
With respect to Claim 9, Matsumoto discloses the focusing system of claim 8, and further discloses wherein the one or more shafts (Fig. 3-- element 22, fitting pins; [0041]) extend through one or more corresponding holes (Fig. 3-- element 24, escape holes; [0041]) defined through (Figs. 1 and 3—element 24 is defined by the placement of element 48) the second tube (Fig. 1-- element 48, exterior lens-barrel; [0068]).
With respect to Claim 10, Matsumoto discloses the focusing system of claim 9, and further discloses wherein at least one of the one or more shafts (Fig. 3-- element 22, fitting pins; [0041]) is threadably connected to at least one of: the elastically deformable element (Fig. 1-- element 6B, leaf spring; [0035]) as the at least one of the one or more shafts (Fig. 3-- element 22, fitting pins; [0041]) extends through the corresponding one of the one or more holes (Fig. 3-- element 24, escape holes; [0041]) defined in the elastically deformable element (Fig. 1-- element 6B, leaf spring; [0035]) (Fig. 3—element 22 is threaded through element 24 on element 6B); and the second tube (Fig. 1-- element 48, exterior lens-barrel; [0068]) as the at least one of the one or more shafts (Fig. 3-- element 22, fitting pins; [0041]) extends through the corresponding one of the one or more holes (Fig. 3-- element 24, escape holes; [0041]) defined through the second tube (Fig. 1-- element 48, exterior lens-barrel; [0068]).
With respect to Claim 11, Matsumoto discloses the focusing system of claim 9, and further discloses comprising a support component (Fig. 3-- element 4, fixed member; [0044]), the support component (Fig. 3-- element 4, fixed member; [0044]) located between (Fig. 1—element 4 located between element 52 and element 6B) the outer surface of the first tube (Fig. 1-- element 52, movable lens-barrel; [0068]) and the elastically deformable element (Fig. 1-- element 6B, leaf spring; [0035]) and wherein the one or more shafts (Fig. 3-- element 22, fitting pins; [0041]) extend through one or more corresponding holes (Fig. 3-- element 24, escape holes; [0041]) defined through the support component (Fig. 3-- element 4, fixed member; [0044]) (Fig. 3— element 24 is aligned with element 22 as defined by the placement of element 22 on element 4).
With respect to Claim 12, Matsumoto discloses the focusing system of claim 11, and further discloses wherein at least one of the one or more shafts (Fig. 3-- element 22, fitting pins; [0041]) is threadably connected (Fig. 3-- element 22 is connected to element 4) to the support component (Fig. 3-- element 4, fixed member; [0044]) as the at least one of the one or more shafts (Fig. 3-- element 22, fitting pins; [0041]) extends through the corresponding one of the one or more holes (Fig. 3-- element 24, escape holes; [0041]) defined through (Figs. 1 and 3—element 24 is defined by the placement of element 48) the second tube (Fig. 1-- element 48, exterior lens-barrel; [0068]).
With respect to Claim 14, Matsumoto discloses the focusing system of claim 1, and further discloses comprising a shaft (Fig. 3-- element 22, fitting pins; [0041]) that extends between and is connected to (Fig. 3—element 22 is attached directly to element 6B and to element 48 via intermediate parts) the elastically deformable element (Fig. 1-- element 6B, leaf spring; [0035]) and the second tube (Fig. 1-- element 48, exterior lens-barrel; [0068]) and wherein the extension is in a direction having a directional component orthogonal to the longitudinal direction (Fig. 3—element 22 extends in a direction orthogonal to the optical axis).
With respect to Claim 17, Matsumoto discloses the focusing system of claim 1, and further discloses comprising first and second bearing supports (Fig. 3-- element 15, holding device; [0040]) located at the first and second sections of the elastically deformable element (Fig. 1-- element 6B, leaf spring; [0035]) and wherein the first and second bearing supports (Fig. 3-- element 15, holding device; [0040]) are shaped to constrain the rolling movement of the first and second rolling bearings (Fig. 3—element 14, rollers; [0040]) along the outer surface of the first tube (Fig. 1-- element 52, movable lens-barrel; [0068]) to the longitudinal direction.
With respect to Claim 18, Matsumoto discloses the focusing system of claim 1, and further discloses wherein the first and second rolling bearings (Fig. 3—element 14, rollers; [0040]) are substantially aligned with one another in the longitudinal direction (Fig. 3—elements 14 are aligned in the optical axis direction).
PNG
media_image1.png
729
608
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With respect to Claim 19, Matsumoto discloses the focusing system of claim 1, and further discloses wherein the first and second rolling bearings (Fig. 3—element 14, rollers; [0040]) comprising ball bearings or ball bearing assemblies ([0040]: element 14 may be a spherical roller).
With respect to Claim 20, Matsumoto discloses the focusing system of claim 1, and further discloses wherein the bore-defining surface of the second tube (Fig. 1-- element 48, exterior lens-barrel; [0068]) is shaped to define a first support and a second support (See annotated Fig. 8-- first support and second support), the first and second supports (See annotated Fig. 8-- first support and second support) extending in the longitudinal direction and having contact surfaces in contact with the outer surface of the first tube (Fig. 1-- element 52, movable lens-barrel; [0068]), the contact surfaces having shapes complementary to a shape of the outer surface of the first tube (Fig. 1-- element 52, movable lens-barrel; [0068]) (Fig. 8—the support surfaces are extending in the optical axis direction and are complimentary to the shape of element 52).
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.
Claims 5, 13, and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsumoto (US20090128931A1, foreign equivalent CN101189542B cited in IDS dated 12/04/2024).
With respect to Claim 5, Matsumoto discloses the focusing system of claim 4; however, Matsumoto does not explicitly disclose wherein a magnitude of the first displacement is different from a magnitude of the second displacement.
It has been held that to reject a claim under a rationale of choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions with a reasonable expectation of success, Office personnel must resolve the Graham factual inquiries. Then, Office personnel must articulate the following:
(1) a finding that at the time of the invention, there had been a recognized problem or need in the art, which may include a design need or market pressure to solve a problem;
(2) a finding that there had been a finite number of identified, predictable potential solutions to the recognized need or problem;
(3) a finding that one of ordinary skill in the art could have pursued the known potential solutions with a reasonable expectation of success; and
(4) whatever additional findings based on the Graham factual inquiries may be necessary, in view of the facts of the case under consideration, to explain a conclusion of obviousness.
The rationale to support a conclusion that the claim would have been obvious is that "a person of ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp. If this leads to the anticipated success, it is likely that product [was] not of innovation but of ordinary skill and common sense. In that instance the fact that a combination was obvious to try might show that it was obvious under § 103." KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. at 421, 82 USPQ2d at 1397. If any of these findings cannot be made, then this rationale cannot be used to support a conclusion that the claim would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP §2143(I)(E).
In the instant case (1) there was a recognized need in the art for a lens barrel which allows for axial movement of lens carriers (2) there is a finite number of orientations of the elastically deformable element (3) one of ordinary skill in the art could have pursued any of these solutions with a reasonable expectation of success (4) the Graham factual inquiries have been explained above.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to choose two different magnitudes of displacement for the elastically deformable element because it has been held that choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions with a reasonable expectation of success is within ordinary skill.
With respect to Claim 13, Matsumoto discloses the focusing system of claim 7, and further discloses the at least one of the one or more shafts (Fig. 3-- element 22, fitting pins; [0041]), the elastically deformable element (Fig. 1-- element 6B, leaf spring; [0035]), and the second tube (Fig. 1-- element 48, exterior lens-barrel; [0068]).
However, Matsumoto does not disclose wherein at least one of the one or more shafts is adjustable to alter a distance between the elastically deformable element and the second tube and wherein varying the distance between the elastically deformable element and the second tube varies an amount of deformation of the elastically deformable element.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to make at least one of the one or more shafts adjustable, since it has been held that adjustability, where needed, involves only routine skill in the art. In re Stevens 101 USPQ 284 (CCPA 1954).
With respect to Claim 15, Matsumoto discloses the focusing system of claim 14, and further discloses the shaft (Fig. 3-- element 22, fitting pins; [0041]), the second tube (Fig. 1-- element 48, exterior lens-barrel; [0068]) and variation of the position of the shaft relative to the second tube (Fig. 1-- element 48, exterior lens-barrel; [0068]) varies an amount of deformation of the elastically deformable member (Figs. 1 and 3—the flexing of element 6A will change the distance between elements 4 and 22 and element 48).
However, Matsumoto does not disclose wherein a position of the shaft relative to the second tube is adjustable.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to make the shaft adjustable, since it has been held that adjustability, where needed, involves only routine skill in the art. In re Stevens 101 USPQ 284 (CCPA 1954).
With respect to Claim 16, Matsumoto discloses the focusing system of claim 15, and further discloses wherein the shaft (Fig. 3-- element 22, fitting pins; [0041]) and the second tube (Fig. 1-- element 48, exterior lens-barrel; [0068]).
However, Matsumoto does not disclose wherein the position of the shaft is threadably adjustable relative to the second tube.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to make the shaft adjustable, since it has been held that adjustability, where needed, involves only routine skill in the art. In re Stevens 101 USPQ 284 (CCPA 1954).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Osawa (US 20190222147 A1) discloses aspects of the instant invention, see Fig. 1 and [0018].
Miller (EP1930761A1) discloses aspects of the instant invention, see Fig. 3 and [0023]-[0028].
Hamasaki (US 20050115358 A1) discloses aspects of the instant invention, see Fig. 10 and [0124]-[0126].
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MACKENZI BOURQUINE whose telephone number is (571)272-5956. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 - 4:30 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, Pinping Sun can be reached at (571) 270-1284. 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.
/MACKENZI BOURQUINE/ Examiner, Art Unit 2872
/WILLIAM R ALEXANDER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Prosecution Insights