DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. 13/676,860, filed on 11/14/2012.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/30/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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. A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO internet Web site contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit http://www.uspto.gov/forms/. The filing date of the application will determine what form 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.
Claim 20 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 9,094,592. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claim 20 of the instant application is a broader recitation and an obvious variation of claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 9,094,592.
Claim 20 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 10,613,291. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claim 20 of the instant application is a broader recitation and an obvious variation of claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 10,613,291.
Claim 20 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 14 of U.S. Patent No. 10,989,893. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claim 20 of the instant application is a broader recitation and an obvious variation of claim 14 of U.S. Patent No. 10,989,893.
Claim 20 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,422,331. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claim 20 of the instant application is a broader recitation and an obvious variation of claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,422,331.
Claim 20 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,774,702. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claim 20 of the instant application is a broader recitation and an obvious variation of claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,774,702.
Claim 20 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 6 of U.S. Patent No. 12,164,173. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claim 20 of the instant application is a broader recitation and an obvious variation of claim 6 of U.S. Patent No. 12,164,173.
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 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:
(b) the invention was patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country or in public use or on sale in this country, more than one year prior to the date of application for patent in the United States.
Claims 18-20 is rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(b) as being anticipated by Nagasaki US 2008/0192124.
Re claim 18, Nagasaki discloses a voice coil motor (voice coil motor lens module 20 for camera), comprising: a printed circuit board (terminal 25 of module 20 connects to flexible printed circuit board) (figure 1; paragraph 72); an image sensor disposed on the printed circuit board (an image sensor is mounted below the lens module) (figure 5; paragraph 56); a holder (lower case 21 of lens module 20) disposed on the printed circuit board (figures 1-2; paragraphs 49-50); a case (upper case 22 of lens module 20) coupled with the holder (21) (figures 1-2; paragraphs 49-50); a lens disposed in the case (22) and disposed at a position corresponding to the image sensor (lens holder 29 holds lens and is disposed in case 22) (figures 1-2; paragraphs 49-50, 56), and a coil (30) and magnet (31) configured to move the lens (lens holder 29 holds lens) (figures 2,7-10; paragraphs 50, 58-62), wherein the holder (21) comprises a lug (36) formed on an outer lateral surface of the holder (21), wherein an upper surface of the lug (36) is contacted with the case (22) or directly facing the case (lugs 36 are formed in the lower case 21 to attach the case 21 to the upper case 22), and wherein a horizontal width of the lug (36) gradually decreases towards the upper surface of the lug (36)(lugs 36 are tapered and arranged to mate with legs 35 of upper case by inserting the uniquely shaped lugs 36 into the legs 35) (figures 5-6; paragraphs 56-57).
Re claim 19, Nagasaki further discloses that the outer lateral surface of the holder (21) comprises first and second outer lateral surfaces opposite to each other, and third and fourth outer lateral surfaces opposite to each other (lower case 21 has four lateral surfaces and is square shaped), and wherein the lug of the holder comprises first and second lugs formed on the first outer lateral surface of the holder and spaced apart from each other (four lugs 36 a formed on the outer surface of the lower case 21 including two lugs 36 on each lateral surface) (figures 5-6; paragraphs 56-57).
Re claim 20, Nagasaki discloses a camera module (lens module 20 for camera), comprising: a printed circuit board (terminal 25 of module 20 connects to flexible printed circuit board) (figure 1; paragraph 72); an image sensor disposed on the printed circuit board (an image sensor is mounted below the lens module) (figure 5; paragraph 56); a holder (lower case 21 of lens module 20) disposed on the printed circuit board (figures 1-2; paragraphs 49-50); a case (upper case 22 of lens module 20) coupled with the holder (21) (figures 1-2; paragraphs 49-50); and a lens disposed in the case (22) and disposed at a position corresponding to the image sensor (lens holder 29 holds lens and is disposed in case 22) (figures 1-2; paragraphs 49-50, 56).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-2, 5-7, 10-11 and 17 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Nagasaki US 2008/0192124 in view of Singh US 2010/0053423.
Re claim 1, Nagasaki discloses a camera module (lens module 20 for camera), comprising: a printed circuit board (terminal 25 of module 20 connects to flexible printed circuit board) (figure 1; paragraph 72); an image sensor disposed on the printed circuit board (an image sensor is mounted below the lens module) (figure 5; paragraph 56); a holder (lower case 21 of lens module 20) disposed on the printed circuit board (figures 1-2; paragraphs 49-50); a case (upper case 22 of lens module 20) coupled with the holder (21) (figures 1-2; paragraphs 49-50); and a lens disposed in the case (22) and disposed at a position corresponding to the image sensor (lens holder 29 holds lens and is disposed in case 22) (figures 1-2; paragraphs 49-50, 56), and wherein the holder (21) comprises a lug (36) formed on an outer lateral surface of the holder (21), wherein an upper surface of the lug (36) is contacted with the case (22) or directly facing the case (lugs 36 are formed in the lower case 21 to attach the case 21 to the upper case 22), and wherein a horizontal width of the lug (36) gradually decreases towards the upper surface of the lug (36)(lugs 36 are tapered and arranged to mate with legs 35 of upper case by inserting the uniquely shaped lugs 36 into the legs 35) (figures 5-6; paragraphs 56-57). In addition, Nagasaki further discloses that an adhesive may be used to fix the springs 27 to the holder 29 (paragraph 58). However, although the Nagasaki reference discloses all of the above limitations it fails to specifically disclose that an adhesive is adhered to the holder and the case.
Singh discloses that it is well known in the art for adhesives to be used to adhere desired components in a camera module together (paragraph 7). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to permanently attach the case and holder of the camera module disclosed by the Nagasaki reference together by using an adhesive as disclosed by the Singh reference. Doing so would provide a means for permanently fixing the different elements of the camera module together.
Re claim 2, Nagasaki further discloses that the outer lateral surface of the holder (21) comprises first and second outer lateral surfaces opposite to each other, and third and fourth outer lateral surfaces opposite to each other (lower case 21 has four lateral surfaces and is square shaped), and wherein the lug of the holder comprises first and second lugs formed on the first outer lateral surface of the holder and spaced apart from each other (four lugs 36 a formed on the outer surface of the lower case 21 including two lugs 36 on each lateral surface) (figures 5-6; paragraphs 56-57).
Re claim 5, Nagasaki further discloses that the first and second lugs are spaced from the third and fourth outer lateral surfaces of the holder (lugs 36 are spaced apart from and offset from the outer lateral surfaces of the lower case 21) (figure 5; paragraph 56).
Re claim 6, Nagasaki further discloses that the holder (lower case 21) comprises a staircase sill and a staircase floor surface (lower case 21 has different levels and contours) facing a lower surface of the case (upper case 22) (legs 36 of lower case 21 are upward extending and mate with legs 35 of upper case 22) (figures 5-6; 56-57). In addition, Singh discloses that it is well known in the art for adhesives to be used to adhere desired components in a camera module together (paragraph 7).
Re claim 7, Nagasaki further discloses that the staircase sill comprises a staircase lateral wall, and wherein the staircase sill lateral wall of the holder (21) is adhered by the case (22) to allow the case (22 and the holder (21) to be tightly coupled (lower case 21 has different levels and contours and legs 36 of lower case 21 are upward extending and mate with legs 35 of upper case 22) (figures 5-6; 56-57).
Re claim 10, Nagasaki further discloses that the staircase floor surface comprises a first area and a second area disposed in the first area, and wherein the second area is disposed lower than the first area is (lower case 21 includes different step areas that are disposed at different levels relative to the vertical direction) (figure 5; paragraph 56).
Re claim 11, Nagasaki further discloses that a horizontal width of the second area is greater than a horizontal width of the first area (lower area of lower case 21 is wider than upper stepped area and protruding portions of the upper area are offset from the outer surfaces of the lower case 21) (figure 5; paragraph 56).
Re claim 17, Nagasaki further discloses that the camera module (20) may be incorporated into a mobile phone (paragraph 3).
Claims 12-15 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Nagasaki US 2008/0192124 in view of Singh US 2010/0053423 and further in view of Kohama US 2012/0248294.
Re claim 12, the combination of the Nagasaki and Singh references discloses all of the limitations of claim 1 above. In addition, Nagasaki further discloses a coil (30) and a magnet (31) configured to move the lens (lens holder 29 holds lens) and a conductive member electrically connected with the coil (lead 56 is electrically connected to coil 30) (paragraph 58). However, although the combination discloses all of the above limitations it fails to specifically disclose an insulation member disposed on the conductive member, wherein the insulation member comprises epoxy and is disposed on an outer surface of the conductive member.
Kohama discloses that it is well known in the art for an imaging device including a lens to include an insulation member that is formed of a curable material such as epoxy cured by light or heat (epoxy used as an insulation member for constructing a circuit board of the imaging device) (paragraph 44). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to include epoxy as an insulation member as disclosed by the Kohama reference in the camera module disclosed by the combination of the Nagasaki and Singh references. Doing so would provide a means for constructing and forming an imaging device and electrically isolating different electrical structures of the imaging device.
Re claim 13, Nagasaki further discloses that the camera module includes a bobbin (holder 24, 29) coupled with the lens; and a spring (27) coupled with the bobbin (24, 29), wherein the magnet (31) faces the coil (30)(figure 2; paragraph 50), wherein the spring (27) is electrically connected with the coil (30), and wherein the conductive member is electrically connected with the spring (lead 56 electrically connects spring 27 to coil 30) (figure 7; paragraph 58).
Re claim 14, Nagasaki further discloses that the conductive member comprises a curved surface and wherein the insulation member is disposed on the curved surface (lead 56 has a curved surface) (figure 15).
Re claim 15, Kohama further discloses that the insulation member is directly disposed on the outer surface of the conductive member so that the outer surface of the conductive member is not exposed outside (an insulation member that is formed of a curable material such as epoxy cured by light or heat (well known for epoxy to be used as an insulation member on an outside surface of a conductive member) (paragraph 44).
Claim 16 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Nagasaki US 2008/0192124 in view of Singh US 2010/0053423 in view of Kohama US 2012/0248294 and further in view of Gutierrez et al. US 2010/0284081.
Re claim 16, the combination of the Nagasaki, Singh and Kohama references discloses all of the limitations of claim 12 above. However, although the combination discloses all of the above limitations it fails to specifically disclose that the conductive member comprises a solder and the insulation member is contacted with solder.
Gutierrez discloses that it is well known in the art for an imaging device including a lens to connect electrical components using conductive epoxy or solder (paragraph 87). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to connect electrical components in an imaging device using solder as disclosed by the Gutierrez reference in the camera module disclosed by the combination of the Nagasaki, Singh and Kohama references. Doing so would provide a means for constructing and forming an imaging device and connecting different electrical structures of the imaging device.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-4 and 8-9 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Re claims 3-4, the prior art fails to teach or suggest a camera module having the specific configurations disclosed in claims 3-4, wherein the camera module comprises: a printed circuit board; an image sensor disposed on the printed circuit board; a holder disposed on the printed circuit board; a case coupled with the holder; a lens disposed in the case and disposed at a position corresponding to the image sensor; and an adhesive adhered to the holder and the case, wherein the holder comprises a lug formed on an outer lateral surface of the holder, wherein an upper surface of the lug is contacted with the case or directly facing the case, and wherein a horizontal width of the lug gradually decreases towards the upper surface of the lug, wherein the outer lateral surface of the holder comprises first and second outer lateral surfaces opposite to each other, and third and fourth outer lateral surfaces opposite to each other, and wherein the lug of the holder comprises first and second lugs formed on the first outer lateral surface of the holder and spaced apart from each other, wherein a space is formed between the first lug and the second lug, and wherein a horizontal width of the space gradually decreases from a top of the space to a bottom of the space. The prior art fails to disclose camera module including a printed circuit board, an image sensor, a holder, a case and a lens arranged the exact configuration disclosed in the specification and the claims.
Re claim 8, the prior art fails to teach or suggest a camera module having the specific configurations disclosed in claim 8, wherein the camera module comprises: a printed circuit board; an image sensor disposed on the printed circuit board; a holder disposed on the printed circuit board; a case coupled with the holder; a lens disposed in the case and disposed at a position corresponding to the image sensor; and an adhesive adhered to the holder and the case, wherein the holder comprises a lug formed on an outer lateral surface of the holder, wherein an upper surface of the lug is contacted with the case or directly facing the case, and wherein a horizontal width of the lug gradually decreases towards the upper surface of the lug, wherein the holder comprises a staircase sill and a staircase floor surface facing a lower surface of the case, and wherein the adhesive is disposed between the staircase floor surface and the lower surface of the case, wherein the staircase floor surface is sloped with respect to the lower surface of the case. The prior art fails to disclose camera module including a printed circuit board, an image sensor, a holder, a case and a lens arranged the exact configuration disclosed in the specification and the claims.
Re claim 9, the prior art fails to teach or suggest a camera module having the specific configurations disclosed in claim 9, wherein the camera module comprises: a printed circuit board; an image sensor disposed on the printed circuit board; a holder disposed on the printed circuit board; a case coupled with the holder; a lens disposed in the case and disposed at a position corresponding to the image sensor; and an adhesive adhered to the holder and the case, wherein the holder comprises a lug formed on an outer lateral surface of the holder, wherein an upper surface of the lug is contacted with the case or directly facing the case, and wherein a horizontal width of the lug gradually decreases towards the upper surface of the lug, wherein the holder comprises a staircase sill and a staircase floor surface facing a lower surface of the case, and wherein the adhesive is disposed between the staircase floor surface and the lower surface of the case, wherein the staircase floor surface is sloped such that a gap between the case and the holder is so designed so as to grow larger to a direction of the staircase sill lateral wall of the holder. The prior art fails to disclose camera module including a printed circuit board, an image sensor, a holder, a case and a lens arranged the exact configuration disclosed in the specification and the claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Fujimori US 2010/0225799 discloses an image sensor module using a UV adhesive to seal a light receiving section of the module.
Contacts
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Kelly L. Jerabek whose telephone number is (571) 272-7312. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday (8:00 AM - 5:00 PM).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, George Eng can be reached at (571) 272-7495. The fax phone number for submitting all Official communications is (571) 273-7300. The fax phone number for submitting informal communications such as drafts, proposed amendments, etc., may be faxed directly to the Examiner at (571) 273-7312.
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 .
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/KELLY L JERABEK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2699