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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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(s) 1, 2, 4 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mizumura (US 2011/0228106 A, cited in IDS) in view of Aikawa et al. (US 2025/0024003 A1) and Dulmage et al. (US 2016/0355198 A1).
As to claim 1, Mizumura discloses a camera component that is formed by a motion picture camera or an accessory device for a motion picture camera (Fig. 1: lens apparatus 10), said camera component comprising
a communication device (Figs.1 and 6: control unit 12) for transmitting at least one of control signals or status signals of the camera component ([0034]: status signals), wherein the communication device comprises a control unit (Figs. 1 and 6: CPU 14) and at least one electrical terminal (Fig.6: communication ports 20 and 28), wherein the at least one electrical terminal has
the communication device is connected to a further communication device of a further camera component (Figs. 1 and 6: the camera body 50 corresponds to the claimed further camera component).
Mizumura fails to disclose the at least one electrical terminal has at least two energy supply contacts; wherein the control unit is configured to perform the following steps when the communication device is connected to a further communication device of a further camera component via the at least one electrical terminal:
- performing a first check whether a communication in accordance with a first protocol is possible with the further communication device;
- then, performing a second check whether a communication in accordance with a second protocol is also possible with the further communication device; and
- in the event of a positive result of the second check, establishing a communication with the further communication device in accordance with the second protocol.
However, Aikawa et al. teaches electrical terminal has energy supply contacts ([0140]: the connection unit is a function of receiving a supply of power from the communication terminal and performing data communication).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Mizumura with the teaching of Aikawa et al. such that the at least one electrical terminal has at least two energy supply contacts, so as to ensure continued operation and enhance connection reliability.
The combination of Mizumura and Aikawa et al. fails to disclose the control unit is configured to perform the following steps when the communication device is connected to a further communication device of a further camera component via the at least one electrical terminal:
- performing a first check whether a communication in accordance with a first protocol is possible with the further communication device;
- then, performing a second check whether a communication in accordance with a second protocol is also possible with the further communication device; and
- in the event of a positive result of the second check, establishing a communication with the further communication device in accordance with the second protocol.
However, Dulmage et al. teaches - performing a first check whether a communication in accordance with a first protocol is possible with the further communication device (Fig.5; [0076]: Step 206: determine whether or not the protocol of the received message is an accepted protocol);
- then, performing a second check whether a communication in accordance with a second protocol is also possible with the further communication device (Fig.5; [0078]: determine an acceptable protocol for the system); and
- in the event of a positive result of the second check, establishing a communication with the further communication device in accordance with the second protocol (Fig.5; [0079]: at 212, protocol of the message is changed to an acceptable protocol; [0089]: at 214, the message in the converted protocol is communicated to the system).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Mizumura and Aikawa et al. with the teaching of Dulmage et al. to performing a first check whether a communication in accordance with a first protocol is possible with the further communication device; then, performing a second check whether a communication in accordance with a second protocol is also possible with the further communication device; and in the event of a positive result of the second check, establishing a communication with the further communication device in accordance with the second protocol, so as to ensure compatibility with devices supporting different communication standards while enabling the use of a higher-performance protocol when available.
As to claim 2, Mizumura in view of Aikawa et al. and Dulmage et al. discloses a camera component according to claim 1, wherein the control unit is configured, in the event of a positive result of the first check, to at least temporarily establish a communication with the further communication device in accordance with the first protocol (Dulmage et al.: Fig.5: steps 206 and 208, if the protocol of the message is an acceptable protocol, communicate the message to a system).
As to claim 4, Mizumura in view of Aikawa et al. and Dulmage et al. discloses a camera component according to claim 1, wherein the control unit is configured to perform the second check in the event of a negative result of the first check (Dulmage et al.: Fig.5: Step 210).
As to claim 14, Mizumura in view of Aikawa et al. and Dulmage et al. discloses a camera component according to claim 1, wherein the at least one electrical terminal of the communication device has only two energy supply contacts and two signal contacts (Mizumura discloses in Fig.6, input ports 20A and output ports 20B which correspond to the claimed two signal contacts. While Aikawa et al. discloses in para [0140] that the connection unit is a function of receiving a supply of power from the communication terminal and performing data communication. Therefore, when combining Aikawa et al. with Mizumura, the two electrical contacts of the electrical terminal would also have the energy supply function).
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mizumura (US 2011/0228106 A, cited in IDS) in view of Aikawa et al. (US 2025/0024003 A1) and Dulmage et al. (US 2016/0355198 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Gage (US 2004/0151136 A1).
As to claim 3, Mizumura in view of Aikawa et al. and Dulmage et al. discloses a camera component according to claim 1, but fails to disclose the control unit is configured to repeat the first check in the event of a negative result of the first check.
However, Gage teaches repeating the first check in the event of a negative result of the first check (Fig.7: at 700, the process determines whether the preferred interface is available; if the preferred interface is not available, error report is generated and sent to the kernel to indicate that currently there is no available suitable interface. The process will then return to box 700 and check again whether preferred interface is available).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Mizumura, Aikawa et al. and Dulmage et al. with the teaching of Gage to repeat the first check in the event of a negative result of the first check, since a person skilled in the art would recognize that an initial failure to establish communication may be due to temporary conditions such as timing issues or signal stability, and that repeating the check to account for transient communication failures and improve connection reliability.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mizumura (US 2011/0228106 A, cited in IDS) in view of Aikawa et al. (US 2025/0024003 A1) and Dulmage et al. (US 2016/0355198 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Ahmed et al. (US 2022/0304084 A1).
As to claim 5, Mizumura in view of Aikawa et al. and Dulmage et al. discloses a camera component according to claim 1, but fails to disclose the step of establishing a communication with the further communication device in accordance with the second protocol comprises the communication device negotiating a master/slave assignment with the further communication device.
However, Ahmed et al. teaches establishing a communication with the further communication device in accordance with the second protocol comprises the communication device negotiating a master/slave assignment with the further communication device ([0054]: “As part of the handshake protocol, the devices 302, 304 may establish a relationship between the devices 302, 304. For example, the devices 302, 304 may establish or negotiate a relationship in which the first device 302 is a master device and the peripheral device(s) 304 are slave (or secondary) devices 304.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Mizumura, Aikawa et al. and Dulmage et al. with the teaching of Ahmed et al. to establish a communication with the further communication device in accordance with the second protocol comprises the communication device negotiating a master/slave assignment with the further communication device, so as to ensure proper operation and avoid communication conflicts.
Claim(s) 6 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mizumura (US 2011/0228106 A, cited in IDS) in view of Aikawa et al. (US 2025/0024003 A1) and Dulmage et al. (US 2016/0355198 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Steinbauer (US 2026/0105269 A1).
As to claims 6 and 7, Mizumura in view of Aikawa et al. and Dulmage et al. discloses a camera component according to claim 1, but fails to disclose wherein the first protocol is a Controller Area Network (CAN) protocol, wherein the second protocol is at least one of a network protocol capable of transmitting time stamps or an Internet Protocol (IP).
However, Steinbauer teaches one or more communication protocols including internet protocol (IP), and controller area network (CAN) protocols ([0044]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Mizumura, Aikawa et al. and Dulmage et al. with the teaching of Steinbauer such that the first protocol is a Controller Area Network (CAN) protocol, wherein the second protocol is at least one of a network protocol capable of transmitting time stamps or an Internet Protocol (IP), since CAN offers reliable low-level communication suitable for control and status signals, while IP provide higher band width and suitable for complex data transmission, thereby, improving communication performance and functionality.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mizumura (US 2011/0228106 A, cited in IDS) in view of Aikawa et al. (US 2025/0024003 A1) and Dulmage et al. (US 2016/0355198 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Tamaki et al. (US 2024/0089712 A1).
As to claim 8, Mizumura in view of Aikawa et al. and Dulmage et al. discloses a camera component according to claim 1, but fails to disclose wherein the second protocol is a Single Pair Ethernet (SPE) protocol.
However, Tamaki et al. teaches a communication protocol including a Single Pair Ethernet (SPE) protocol ([0026]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Mizumura, Aikawa et al. and Dulmage et al. with the teaching of Tamaki et al. such that the second protocol is a Single Pair Ethernet (SPE) protocol, so as to reduce cabling complexity, size and weight.
Claim(s) 9 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mizumura (US 2011/0228106 A, cited in IDS) in view of Aikawa et al. (US 2025/0024003 A1) and Dulmage et al. (US 2016/0355198 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Toth et al. (US 2014/0101337 A1).
As to claim 9, Mizumura in view of Aikawa et al. and Dulmage et al. discloses a camera component according to claim 1, but fail to discloses the control unit of the communication device comprises at least one controller, at least one first transceiver corresponding to the first protocol, at least one second transceiver corresponding to the second protocol and at least one switching device,
wherein the at least one switching device is configured to selectively couple the at least one first transceiver or the at least one second transceiver to the at least two signal contacts of the at least one electrical terminal of the communication device in order to transmit signals via the at least one electrical terminal, and
wherein the controller is configured to control the coupling of the at least one first transceiver and the at least one second transceiver to the at least two signal contacts of the communication device.
However, Toth et al. teaches at least one controller (Fig.3: Network selector 324), at least one first transceiver corresponding to the first protocol (Fig.3: First protocol DSI 306), at least one second transceiver corresponding to the second protocol (Fig.3: second protocol DSI 308) and at least one switching device (Fig.3: Network switch 326),
wherein the at least one switching device is configured to selectively couple the at least one first transceiver or the at least one second transceiver to the at least two signal contacts of the at least one electrical terminal of the communication device in order to transmit signals via the at least one electrical terminal ([0024]: “when the network selector 324 selects the first network, the network switch 326 connects to the first protocol DSI 306. When the network selector 324 selects the second network, the network switch 326 connects to the second protocol DSI 308”. Please note that the at least two signal contacts are disclosed in Fig.6 of Mizumura: input ports 20A and output ports 20B), and
wherein the controller is configured to control the coupling of the at least one first transceiver and the at least one second transceiver to the at least two signal contacts of the communication device ([0024]: “Network switch 326 receives the network selection from network selector 324”. Network selector 324 corresponds to the claimed controller).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Mizumura, Aikawa et al. and Dulmage et al. with the teaching of Toth et al. to include at least one controller, at least one first transceiver corresponding to the first protocol, at least one second transceiver corresponding to the second protocol and at least one switching device, wherein the at least one switching device is configured to selectively couple the at least one first transceiver or the at least one second transceiver to the at least two signal contacts of the at least one electrical terminal of the communication device in order to transmit signals via the at least one electrical terminal, and wherein the controller is configured to control the coupling of the at least one first transceiver and the at least one second transceiver to the at least two signal contacts of the communication device, so as to enable multi-protocol compatibility and facilitate seamless transition between protocols, thereby ensuring reliable communication connection.
As to claim 10, Mizumura in view of Aikawa et al., Dulmage et al. and Toth et al. discloses a camera component according to claim 9, wherein the communication device of the camera component has two electrical terminals (Mizumura: Fig.6: communication ports 20 and 28) and an interface for a signal transmission between the communication device and a component function control unit of the camera component (Mizumura: Fig.6, [0052]: connector 40 corresponds to the claimed interface),
wherein the controller of the communication device is configured to control a transmission of signals between the two electrical terminals of the communication device and/or between one of the two electrical terminals and the interface of the communication device (Mizumura: [0033]: “The CPU 14 is configured to perform data communication to and from the external apparatuses 50, 52, and 54 through communication ports 20, 22, and 24”).
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mizumura (US 2011/0228106 A, cited in IDS) in view of Aikawa et al. (US 2025/0024003 A1) and Dulmage et al. (US 2016/0355198 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Graziani et al. (US 2014/0101337 A1).
As to claim 13, Mizumura in view of Aikawa et al. and Dulmage et al. discloses a camera component according to claim 1, but fails to disclose the control unit is configured to perform an assessment of the signal transmission quality after establishing a communication with the further communication device in accordance with the second protocol and, in the event of a negative result of the assessment, to establish a communication with the further communication device in accordance with the first protocol instead of the second protocol.
However, Graziani et al. teaches performing an assessment of the signal transmission quality after establishing a communication with the further communication device in accordance with the second protocol (Col.25, lines 15-19: “the second connection prediction may represent whether transmitting data using the second wireless communication protocol is predicted to have a lower transmission quality than transmitting data using the first wireless communication protocol”) and, in the event of a negative result of the assessment, to establish a communication with the further communication device in accordance with the first protocol instead of the second protocol (Col.25, lines 48-50: “the STA device selects the protocol having a higher transmission quality”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Mizumura, Aikawa et al. and Dulmage et al. with the teaching of Graziani et al. to perform an assessment of the signal transmission quality after establishing a communication with the further communication device in accordance with the second protocol and, in the event of a negative result of the assessment, to establish a communication with the further communication device in accordance with the first protocol instead of the second protocol, so as to improve communication reliability.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mizumura (US 2011/0228106 A, cited in IDS) in view of Aikawa et al. (US 2025/0024003 A1) and Dulmage et al. (US 2016/0355198 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Sugita (US 2023/0113949 A1).
As to claim 15, Mizumura in view of Aikawa et al. and Dulmage et al. discloses a camera component according to claim 1, but fails to disclose the camera component is formed by an accessory device for a motion picture camera, said accessory device comprising a setting motor for a camera lens, a motorized optical filter, a motor-adjustable camera holder, a camera stabilization device, an image stabilization device, a remote control device or a film set lighting device.
However, Sugita teaches an accessory device for a motion picture camera, said accessory device comprising a setting motor for a camera lens, a motorized optical filter, a motor-adjustable camera holder, a camera stabilization device, an image stabilization device, a remote control device or a film set lighting device (Fig.1A; [0050]: stepping motors 107 and 108).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Mizumura, Aikawa et al. and Dulmage et al. with the teaching of Sugita to include an accessory device for a motion picture camera, said accessory device comprising a setting motor for a camera lens, a motorized optical filter, a motor-adjustable camera holder, a camera stabilization device, an image stabilization device, a remote control device or a film set lighting device, so as to improve interoperability of the device.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11 and 12 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 16-19 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding independent claim 16, the prior art of record Mizumura (US 2011/0228106 A, cited in IDS) discloses a camera component that is formed by a motion picture camera or an accessory device for a motion picture camera (Fig. 1: lens apparatus 10), said camera component comprising
a communication device (Figs.1 and 6: control unit 12) for transmitting at least one of control signals or status signals of the camera component ([0034]: status signals), wherein the communication device comprises a control unit (Figs. 1 and 6: CPU 14) and at least one electrical terminal (Fig.6: communication ports 20 and 28), wherein the at least one electrical terminal has at least two signal contacts (Fig.6: input ports 20A and output ports 20B),
the communication device is connected to a further communication device of a further camera component (Figs. 1 and 6: the camera body 50 corresponds to the claimed further camera component).
Prior art of record Aikawa et al. (US 2025/0024003 A1) teaches electrical terminal has energy supply contacts ([0140]: the connection unit is a function of receiving a supply of power from the communication terminal and performing data communication).
Prior art of record Dulmage et al. (US 2025/0024003 A1) teaches - performing a first check whether a communication in accordance with a first protocol is possible with the further communication device (Fig.5; [0076]: Step 206: determine whether or not the protocol of the received message is an accepted protocol);
- performing a second check whether a communication in accordance with a second protocol is also possible with the further communication device (Fig.5; [0078]: determine an acceptable protocol for the system); and
- in the event of a positive result of the second check, establishing a communication with the further communication device in accordance with the second protocol (Fig.5; [0079]: at 212, protocol of the message is changed to an acceptable protocol; [0089]: at 214, the message in the converted protocol is communicated to the system).
Prior art of record Gage (US 2004/0151136 A1) discloses - in the event of a negative result of the first check, repeating the first check (Fig.7: at 700, the process determines whether the preferred interface is available; if the preferred interface is not available, error report is generated and sent to the kernel to indicate that currently there is no available suitable interface. The process will then return to box 700 and check again whether preferred interface is available).
However, none of the prior art discloses or reasonably suggests: “- in the event of a positive result of the first check, at least temporarily establishing a communication with the further communication device in accordance with the first protocol and performing a second check whether a communication in accordance with a second protocol is also possible with the further communication device; - in the event of a negative result of the second check, continuing the communication with the further communication device in accordance with the first protocol”, in combination with other limitations recited in the claim.
Claim 17 is also allowed as being dependent from claim 16.
Regarding independent claim 18, the prior art of record Mizumura (US 2011/0228106 A, cited in IDS) discloses a camera component that is formed by a motion picture camera or an accessory device for a motion picture camera (Fig. 1: lens apparatus 10), said camera component comprising
a communication device (Figs.1 and 6: control unit 12) for transmitting at least one of control signals or status signals of the camera component ([0034]: status signals), wherein the communication device comprises a control unit (Figs. 1 and 6: CPU 14) and at least one electrical terminal (Fig.6: communication ports 20 and 28), wherein the at least one electrical terminal has at least two signal contacts (Fig.6: input ports 20A and output ports 20B),
the communication device is connected to a further communication device of a further camera component (Figs. 1 and 6: the camera body 50 corresponds to the claimed further camera component).
Prior art of record Aikawa et al. (US 2025/0024003 A1) teaches electrical terminal has energy supply contacts ([0140]: the connection unit is a function of receiving a supply of power from the communication terminal and performing data communication).
Prior art of record Dulmage et al. (US 2025/0024003 A1) teaches - performing a first check whether a communication in accordance with a first protocol is possible with the further communication device (Fig.5; [0076]: Step 206: determine whether or not the protocol of the received message is an accepted protocol);
- performing a second check whether a communication in accordance with a second protocol is also possible with the further communication device (Fig.5; [0078]: determine an acceptable protocol for the system); and
- in the event of a positive result of the second check, establishing a communication with the further communication device in accordance with the second protocol (Fig.5; [0079]: at 212, protocol of the message is changed to an acceptable protocol; [0089]: at 214, the message in the converted protocol is communicated to the system).
Prior art of record Gage (US 2004/0151136 A1) discloses - in the event of a negative result of the first check, repeating the first check (Fig.7: at 700, the process determines whether the preferred interface is available; if the preferred interface is not available, error report is generated and sent to the kernel to indicate that currently there is no available suitable interface. The process will then return to box 700 and check again whether preferred interface is available).
However, none of the prior art discloses or reasonably suggests: “- in the event of a positive result of the first check, at least temporarily establishing a communication with the further communication device in accordance with the first protocol and performing a second check whether a communication in accordance with a second protocol is also possible with the further communication device;
- in the event of a negative result of the second check, continuing the communication with the further communication device in accordance with the first protocol;
- in the event of a negative result of the first check, performing an alternative second check whether a communication in accordance with the second protocol is possible with the further communication device;
- in the event of a negative result of the alternative second check, repeating the first check; and
- in the event of a positive result of the alternative second check, establishing a communication with the further communication device in accordance with the second protocol”, in combination with other limitations recited in the claim.
Claim 19 is also allowed as being dependent from claim 18.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZHENZHEN WU whose telephone number is (571)272-2519. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30 am - 5:30 pm.
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, SINH TRAN can be reached at (571)272-7564. 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.
/ZHENZHEN WU/Examiner, Art Unit 2637
/SINH TRAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2637
Prosecution Insights