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 .
This action is in response to the Remarks and Claims filed on 07/09/2026
This application is a CON of 17/981,775 now a PAT 12,160,667 B2
The application has a FP date of 11/10/2021
Claims 1 and 16 are independent
Claims 1-17 are pending
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 07/09/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Claims 1 and 16 have been amended and now recites “wherein the proportion of the second image stabilizer in the correction ratio is larger at a first timing in which the distance to the moveable end of the first image stabilizer at a first distance at a second timing, which is different from the first timing…". However, no where in the instant Application or in the parent patent has this feature been disclosed. During a recent conversation with the Applicant’s representative, Examiner was informed, that the objective of the amendments we to highlight that the second distance is longer than the first.
Since the amendments do not overcome the double patenting rejection, Examiner would like to continue to maintain the rejections as detailed in the following detailed action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claims 1 and 16 now recites “wherein the proportion of the second image stabilizer in the correction ratio is larger at a first timing in which the distance to the moveable end of the first image stabilizer at a first distance at a second timing, which is different from the first timing…". However, no where in the instant Application or in the parent patent has this feature been disclosed so as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor had possessed.
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 claims at issue 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); and 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 a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this 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 §§ 706.02(l)(1) - 706.02(l)(3) 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 USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/forms/. The 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 http://www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claims 1-17 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-14 of U.S. Patent Number 12,160,667 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other as shown in the following table.
1. Application: A control apparatus configured to perform image stabilization using a first image stabilizer and a second image stabilizer, the control apparatus comprising:
1. Patent 12,160,667 B2: A control apparatus configured to perform image stabilization using a first image stabilizer and a second image stabilizer, the control apparatus comprising:
a memory storing instructions; and at least one processor that executes the instructions to:
1. Patent 12,160,667 B2: a memory storing instructions; and at least one processor that executes the instructions to:
so that a proportion of the second image stabilizer in the correction ratio increases as a distance to a movable end of the first image stabilizer decreases,
1. Patent 12,160,667 B2: determine a correction ratio between the first image stabilizer and the second image stabilizer so that a proportion of the second image stabilizer in the correction ratio increase as a distance to a moveable end of the first image stabilizer decreases;
wherein the portion of the second image stabilizer in the is larger at a first timing in which a distance to a movable end of the first image stabilizer is a first distance is larger than
8. Patent 12,160,667 B2: determines the correction ratio among the first image stabilizer, the second image stabilizer, and the third image stabilizer; so that a proportion of the third image stabilizer in the correction ratio increases as the distance to the moveable end of the first image stabilizer from the second image stabilizer decreases
2. Application: wherein the at least one processor: calculate the shortest distance from a current position of the first image stabilizer to a position of the movable end,
2. Patent 12,160,667 B2: wherein the at least one processor increases the proportion of the second stabilizer in the correction ratio as the shortest distance becomes shorter.
3. Application: wherein the at least one processor performs the image stabilization using the first image stabilizer, in a case where the shortest distance is larger than a predetermined threshold,
1. Patent 12,160,667 B2: performs the image stabilization: using the first image stabilizer in a state where the shortest distance is larger than a predetermined threshold; and
1. Patent 12,160,667 B2: cooperatively controlling the first image stabilizer and the second image stabilizer in a state where the shortest distance is smaller than the predetermined threshold.
4. Application: wherein the at least one processor changes the predetermined threshold based on at least one control characteristic of the first image stabilizer or the second image stabilizer.
3. Patent 12,160,667 B2: wherein the at least one processor changes the predetermined threshold based on at least one control characteristics of the first image stabilizer or the second image stabilizer.
While Claim 5, claims one image stabilizer has a better performance than the second, and Patent 12,160,667 does not claim similar limitation, Examiner takes Official Notice that it is well known in the art that when two image stabilizers are present, one would have a better performance than the other.
While Claim 6, claims one image stabilizer consumes less power than the other, and Patent 12,160,667 does not claim similar limitation, Examiner takes Official Notice that it is well known in the art that when two image stabilizers are present, one would consume less power than the other.
7. Application: wherein the first image stabilizer includes a correction lens that constitutes part of an imaging optical system, wherein the second image stabilizer includes an image sensor or an electronic image stabilizer
4. Patent 12,160,667 B2: wherein: the first image stabilizer includes a correction lens that constitutes part of an imaging optical system, and the second image stabilizer includes an image sensor or an electronic stabilizer.
8. Application: wherein the at least one processor calculates the shortest distance from a current position of the first image stabilizer to a position of the movable
5. Patent 12,160,667 B2: wherein the at least one processor calculates the shortest distance from the current position of the first image stabilizer to the position of the moveable end of the first image stabilizer using information on at least one of a zoom state or a focus state of the imaging optical system.
9. Application: wherein the first image stabilizer includes an image sensor, wherein the second image stabilizer includes a correction lens or an electronic image stabilizer
10. Patent 12,160,667 B2: wherein the first image stabilizer includes an image sensor, the second image stabilizer includes a correction lens, and the third image stabilizer includes an electronic image stabilizer.
10. Application: s the shortest distance from a current position of the first image stabilizer to a position of the movable end,
7. Patent 12,160,667 B2: wherein the at least one processor calculates the shortest distance from the current position of the first image stabilizer to the position of the moveable end of the first image stabilizer
or a focus state of an imaging optical system
using information on an effective area of the image sensor and information on at least one of a zoom state or a focus state of an imaging optical system.
11. Application: wherein the control apparatus performs the image stabilization using the first image stabilizer, the second image stabilizer, and a third image stabilizer, wherein the at least one processor determines a correction ratio among the first image stabilizer, the second image stabilizer, and the third image stabilizer, and
8. Patent 12,160,667 B2: wherein the at least one processor: performs the image stabilization using the first image stabilizer, the second image stabilizer and a third image stabilizer; determines a correction ratio among the first image stabilizer, the second image stabilizer, and the third image stabilizer, so that a proportion of the third image stabilizer in the correction ratio increases as the distance to the movable end of the first image stabilizer from the second image stabilizer decreases.
12. Application: wherein the first image stabilizer includes a correction lens, wherein the second image stabilizer includes an image sensor, and wherein the third image stabilizer includes an electronic image stabilizer.
9. Patent 12,160,667 B2: wherein the first image stabilizer includes a correction lens, wherein the second image stabilizer includes an image sensor, and wherein the third image stabilizer includes an electronic image stabilizer.
13. Application: wherein the first image stabilizer includes an image sensor, wherein the second image stabilizer includes a correction lens, and wherein the third image stabilizer includes an electronic image stabilizer.
10. Patent 12,160,667 B2: wherein the first image stabilizer includes an image sensor, wherein the second image stabilizer includes a correction lens, and wherein the third image stabilizer includes an electronic image stabilizer.
Claim 14-17 are similarly rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over 1-14 of U.S. Patent Number 12,160,667 B2.
Conclusion
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 PADMA HALIYUR whose telephone number is (571)272-3287. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7AM - 4PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Twyler Haskins can be reached at 571-272-7406. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/PADMA HALIYUR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2639 July 29, 2026
Prosecution Insights