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 .
DETAILED ACTION
The instant application having Application No. 18957986 filed on 11/24/2024 is presented for examination by the examiner.
Examiner Notes
Examiner cites particular columns and line numbers in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested that, in preparing responses, the applicant fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner.
Priority
As required by e M.P.E.P. 214, acknowledgement is made of applicant’s claim for priority based on continuation of application 17326682 filed on 05/21/2021 which claim foreign application CN 202011505170.7, filed on 12/18/2020 (China).
Receipt is acknowledged of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
Drawings
The applicant’s drawings submitted are acceptable for examination purposes.
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 conflicting claims 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); 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 nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined 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 § 2146 et seq. 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 filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual 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 www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1, 2 and 3 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 and 2 of U.S. Patent No. US 12181726 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other as presented in claims correspondence table below:
Instant application 18957986
U.S. Patent No. US 12181726 B2
Notes:
1. An anti-twist structure of voice coil motor, comprising: a base; a lens housing connected to the base, wherein the lens housing has a margin wall with a first protrusion, a second protrusion, and a contact portion, wherein the contact portion is extended outwardly an outer periphery of the first protrusion, and the second protrusion is protruded from the contact portion, wherein the first protrusion and the second protrusion are protruded along an axial direction substantially perpendicular to the margin wall; an elastic sheet disposed on a portion of the margin wall and on the contact portion; and a yoke member having an upper wall and a side wall, wherein the side wall is disposed at one side of the upper wall and the side wall extends outward in a direction not parallel to the upper wall, and wherein the yoke member is connected to the base; wherein the lens housing has a deflectable angle relative to a horizontal reference line, and the deflectable angle is an included angle between the lens housing and the horizontal reference line; and wherein when the lens housing deflects from the horizontal reference line to a maximum value of the deflectable angle, a top surface of the first protrusion abuts against a bottom surface of the upper wall, the second protrusion abuts against the elastic sheet, and the contact portion abuts against the elastic sheet or the bottom surface of the upper wall at the same time, whereby the lens housing and the yoke member interfere with each other.
1. An anti-twist structure of voice coil motor, comprising: a base; a lens housing connected to the base, wherein the lens housing has a margin wall and an inner flange, and the margin wall has a first protrusion, a second protrusion, and a contact portion, wherein the contact portion is extended outwardly from an outer periphery of the first protrusion, a groove is disposed between the inner flange and the first protrusion, and the second protrusion is protruded from the contact portion, and a height of the second protrusion is lower than a height of the first protrusion, wherein the first protrusion and the second protrusion are protruded along an axial direction substantially perpendicular to the margin wall; an elastic sheet having a hollowed slot, wherein the first protrusion passes through the hollowed slot so that the elastic sheet is disposed on a portion of the margin wall and on the contact portion, wherein elastic sheet comprises a first extension arm in the hollow slot, and the first extension arm is disposed in the groove; a magnet disposed on the base and located at one side of the lens housing, wherein the magnet is connected to the elastic sheet; and a yoke member having an upper wall and a side wall, wherein the side wall is disposed at one side of the upper wall and the side wall extends outward in a direction not parallel to the upper wall, and wherein the yoke member is connected to the base so that the yoke member surrounds the lens housing, the elastic sheet, and the magnet; wherein the lens housing has a deflectable angle relative to a horizontal reference line, and the deflectable angle is an included angle between the lens housing and the horizontal reference line; and wherein when the lens housing deflects from the horizontal reference line to a maximum value of the deflectable angle, a top surface of the first protrusion abuts against a bottom surface of the upper wall, and the contact portion abuts against the elastic sheet or the bottom surface of the upper wall at the same time, whereby the lens housing and the yoke member interfere with each other, and wherein when the lens housing deflects to the maximum value of the deflectable angle, the second protrusion abuts against the elastic sheet.
2. The anti-twist structure of voice coil motor according to claim 1, wherein the deflectable angle is not greater than 2.7 degrees.
2. The anti-twist structure of voice coil motor according to claim 1, wherein the deflectable angle is not greater than 2.7 degrees.
3
1
Double Patenting
Claims 1-7 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-6 of copending Application No. US 18957982 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other as presented in the claims correspondence table below:
Instant application 18957986
Co-pending application 18957982
Notes:
1
1
2
2
3
3
*
4
4
*
5
1
6
5
7
6
(*) magnet is considered oblivious over magnets, and magnets are part of the magnet setup of the voice coil motor.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
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 1-7 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 1 recites the limitation “wherein the contact portion is extended outwardly an outer periphery of the first protrusion” in lines 6-7. However, this limitation is confusing because it is unclear how it can be interpreted, given that it is unclear where and how can the contact portion [is] extended outwardly an outer periphery of the first protrusion? Is the contact portion configured in some way to extend outwardly an outer periphery of the first protrusion? Or is the contact portion extended from or extended at or extended towards an outer periphery of the first protrusion, and if so then in what particular direction, e.g. radial, axial, or vertical or some other direction? For the purposes of examination the above limitation will be treated broadly such that any of the above example or similar combination may read on the limitation above. It is suggested to amend the claim and provide explanations in order to remove the indefiniteness issues.
Claims 2-7 depend on claim 1 and therefore inherit the same deficiency.
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.
Claims 1, 3-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kim et al. (hereafter Kim, of record, see IDS dated 11/25/2024) US 20120146432 A1.
In regard independent claim 1, Kim teaches (see Figs. 1-4) an anti-twist structure of voice coil motor (i.e. voice coil motor 800, with structures inhibiting rotation of the bobbin, see Abstract, paragraphs [09-16, 22-33, 37-46, 48-52, 62-68]), comprising:
a base (base 400, stator 200, spacer 700, paragraphs [22, 45], Fig. 1);
a lens housing connected to the base (i.e. bobbin 180 with coil block 190, as e.g. rotor 100, accommodating a lens, and connected to 400, 200, paragraphs [23-26, 38-44], Figs. 1,4), wherein the lens housing has a margin wall (i.e. margin wall of 180 with upper contact surface 162 and protrusions 164 and 160 between portions of 162, Fig. 2) with a first protrusion, a second protrusion and a contact portion (i.e. as support block 160 with upper surface 162, the protrusions 164 and protruding portions of 160 between two upper surface 162 portions paragraphs [25-29], and as inner flange portion of 180 with top upper surface 182, inner threaded portion and parts of 162, paragraphs [25-28, 38, 43-44], Fig. 2), wherein the contact portion is extended an outer periphery of the first protrusion (i.e. as at least parts of 160, 162 extend at outer periphery of 164, as depicted in Figs. 1-2, paragraphs [25-29]), and
the second protrusion is protruded from the contact portion (i.e. as protruding portions of 160, protruding from between two upper surface 162 portions, as depicted in Figs. 1-2, paragraphs [25-28]), wherein the first protrusion and the second protrusion are protruded along an axial direction substantially perpendicular to the margin wall (i.e. as protrusions 164 and protrusions of 160 between 162 protrude in axial direction of the lens in rotor 100 (180, 190) substantially perpendicular to margin wall of 180 with upper contact surface 162, as depicted in Fig. 2, paragraphs [25-28]);
an elastic sheet (i.e. e.g. upper/lower elastic member 370, 350 of elastic member 300, with 370 having e.g. outer, inner and coupling portions i.e. 371-outer, 373 inner, 375-coupling portion, with hollowed slot(s) in/between 371, 373 and 375 of 370, as depicted in Figs. 1-2, paragraphs [22, 38, 43-44]) disposed on a portion of the margin wall and on the contact portion (i.e. as 373 is coupled onto 182 upper surface with 164 passing through slots between 373, 375 and 371, and 373, 375 being over parts of 182, 160, 162, see Figs. 1-2, paragraphs [38, 43-44]);
a yoke member having an upper wall and a side wall (i.e. as cover and housing 600, 500 with top plate 510, 610, and side plate 520, 620, and housing the stator 200 with magnets 210, paragraphs [22, 64, 68], see Figs. 1, 3-4), wherein the side wall is disposed at one side of the upper wall and the side wall extends outward in a direction not parallel to the upper wall (i.e. as side plate 520,620 at one side of top plate 510, 610, and extending outward not parallel to 510,610, as depicted in Figs. 1, 3, paragraphs [22, 64-68]), and wherein the yoke member is connected to the base (i.e. as 500,600 is connected to 400, and surrounds 180, 300, 370,350 and 210 in 250, 200, paragraphs [22-24, 34-37, 64-68], as depicted in Fig. 1);
wherein the lens housing has a deflectable angle relative to a horizontal reference line (since 180 is suspended by 300 it can tilt/rotate from the horizontal plane by such deflectable angle, and due to presence of anti-rotation portions 164 inhibiting such rotation when rotating force is applied to the bobbin 180 for various reasons, see paragraphs [09, 16, 27-29, 67]), and the deflectable angle is an included angle between the lens housing and the horizontal reference line (i.e. as deflectable angle can be included or measured between some part of surface of 180 and some horizontal reference line in horizontal plane of 800, see paragraphs [09, 16, 27-29, 67], Figs. 1-3), and
wherein when the lens housing deflects from the horizontal reference line to a maximum value of the deflectable angle (e.g. maximum rotational tilt deflection angle of 180 from horizonal reference line, paragraphs [09, 16, 27-29, 67], Figs. 1-3, with note that the limitation after the conditional and time-dependent term “when” are treated as optional as they are not positively recited), a top surface of the first protrusion abuts against a bottom surface of the upper wall (i.e. as due to inhibiting rotation of 180, with top surface of anti-rotation portion 164 abutting bottom of 520, 620 with 514, 614, paragraphs [65-67, 27-29,16]), the second protrusion abuts against the elastic sheet (i.e. as top part of protruding portions between two 162 portions is at the level of 182 upper surface where 370, 373 portion is disposed, as depicted in Figs. 1-2, paragraphs [25-28], as maximum rotational tilt deflection angle of 180 from horizonal reference line, paragraphs [09, 16, 27-29, 67], Figs. 1-3, where it is noted that the limitations after the conditional, time-dependent term “when” are treated as optional as they are not positively recited), and the contact portion abuts against the elastic sheet or the bottom surface of the upper wall at the same time (i.e. as upper surface of 160 abuts bottom of 510 at 512, and buts 370 since 373 is coupled to 182, paragraphs [65-67, 38, 43-44], Figs. 1-3; note that this limitation is after the conditional and time-dependent term “when” are treated as optional as they are not positively recited), whereby the lens housing and the yoke member interfere with each other (i.e. as 180 and 500, 600 interfere due to contacting, paragraphs [65-67, 27-29,16], Figs. 1-3).
Regarding claim 3, Kim teaches (see Figs. 1-4) further comprising a magnet disposed on the base and located at one side of the lens housing (i.e. as magnet(s) 210 in 200 on 400, at side of 180,100, paragraphs [22-24, 34-37], Figs. 1-2), wherein the magnet is connected to the elastic sheet (i.e. as magnets 210 are in 250 of 200 connected to 370, 300, paragraphs [34-45], Figs. 1-2).
Regarding claim 4, Kim teaches (see Figs. 1-4) further comprising magnets disposed at the corners of the base and located at the outer periphery of the lens housing (i.e. as magnet(s) 210 in 200 on 400, and at outer periphery of 180,100, paragraphs [22-24, 34-37], Figs. 1-2), wherein the magnets are connected to the elastic sheet (i.e. as 210 is in 250 of 200 connected to 370, 300, paragraphs [34-45], Figs. 1-2).
Regarding claim 5, Kim teaches (see Figs. 1-4) that the lens housing (180,100) further comprising an inner flange (inner flange portion of 180 with top upper surface 182, Fig. 2), a first groove is disposed between the inner flange and the first protrusion (i.e. as groove between inner flange 180, 182 and 162, as depicted in Figs. 1-2, paragraphs [25-28, 38, 43-44]),
wherein a first extension arm of the elastic sheet is disposed in the first groove (i.e.as inner portion 373 has extension arm portion extending from coupling portion 375, that is in hollowed slot(s) in/between 371, 373 and 375 of 370, and as extension arm portion 373 is in groove between inner flange 180, 182 and 162, as it is coupled to upper flange surface 182, as depicted in Figs. 1-2, paragraphs [25-28, 38, 43-44]);
Regarding claim 6, Kim teaches (see Figs. 1-4) further comprising a voice coil disposed around the outer peripheral edge of the lens housing (i.e. voice coil motor 800, with coil block 190 around outer periphery of 180, 100 paragraphs [24-33, 36-42]).
Regarding claim 7, Kim teaches (see Figs. 1-4) that the voice coil is engaged with a second groove between the first protrusion and the second protrusion (i.e. as best understood, 190 is structurally engaged with second groove between protrusions 164 and protrusions between 162 on 160, see Figs. 1-2, paragraphs [24-33, 36-42]).
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 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (hereafter Kim, of record, see IDS dated 11/25/2024) US 20120146432 A1.
Regarding claim 2, Kim teaches (see Figs. 1-4) that the deflectable angle is not greater than few degrees (i.e. as 180 suspended by 300 can tilt/rotate from the horizontal plane by deflectable angle, but due to anti-rotation portions 164 and 512, 614 on 500, 600 that are inhibiting rotation when rotating force is applied to the bobbin 180 for various reasons, see paragraphs [09, 16, 27-29, 64-68]).
Kim thus discloses the claimed invention except for deflectable angle is not greater than 2.7 degrees (it is noted that such rotation/tilt angle is inhibited by anti-rotation portions/stoppers on 180 namely 164 projections and 512, 614 anti-rotation portions and stoppers on 500,600, paragraphs [09, 16, 27-29, 64-68], therefore inhibited rotation/tilt angle is very small and close to zero, as inhibited angle). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to optimize the possible rotation of the bobbin not to be greater than 2.7 degrees, in order to inhibit the bobbin from rotating when rotating force is applied to the bobbin for various reasons thus smoothly driving the bobbin (see paragraphs [11, 28, 67]), and since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art, In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233 (C.C.P.A. 1955).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Konuma et al. US 20190204532 A1 also recited similar features as the claimed invention (see e.g. Figs. 2-3, 7-9 and their descriptions).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARIN PICHLER whose telephone number is (571)272-4015. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30am -5:00pm.
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, Thomas K Pham can be reached on (571)272-3689. 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.
/MARIN PICHLER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Prosecution Insights