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 § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-5 and 10-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hu et al., (Hu hereafter) (US 2020/0209439 A1).
With respect to Claim 1, Hu discloses an optical system, comprising: an aperture module (6-102, 6-150, Figure 57, and 6-OE, Figure 59), having a housing (6-102, Figure 57), an aperture mechanism (6-150, Figure 57, includes an aperture; see ¶[0325]) (6-150, Figure 57, includes an aperture; see ¶[0325]), and an optical element (6-OE, Figure 59), wherein the aperture mechanism (6-150, Figure 57, includes an aperture; see ¶[0325]) and the optical element (6-OE, Figure 59) are disposed in the housing (6-102, Figure 57); and an optical module (6-110, Figure 57), connected to the aperture module (6-102, 6-150, Figure 57, and 6-OE, Figure 59) along a vertical direction (z-axis direction, Figure 57), wherein an external light (6-L, Figure 58) propagates through the aperture mechanism (6-150, Figure 57, includes an aperture; see ¶[0325]) and the optical element (6-OE, Figure 59) along the vertical direction (z-axis direction, Figure 57) to the optical module (6-110, Figure 57).
With respect to Claim 2, Hu further discloses wherein the optical module (6-110, Figure 57) has a prism (6-1410, Figure 58), a fixed part (6-104, Figure 58) and a movable part (6-MA, Figure 61), the movable part (6-MA, Figure 61) is movably received in (see Figure 61) the fixed part (6-104, Figure 58), and the prism (6-1410, Figure 58) is disposed on the movable part (6-MA, Figure 61) for reflecting the external light (6-L, Figure 58).
With respect to Claim 3, Hu further discloses wherein a part of the optical element (6-OE, Figure 59) extends into the optical module (6-110, Figure 57).
With respect to Claim 4, Hu further discloses wherein the optical element (6-OE, Figure 59) is affixed to the prism (6-1410, Figure 58).
With respect to Claim 5, Hu further discloses wherein the optical element (6-OE, Figure 59) is affixed to the movable part (6-MA, Figure 61).
With respect to Claim 10, Hu further discloses wherein the optical element (6-OE, Figure 59) is spaced apart (see 6-102 which comprises 6-OE is spaced from 6-150, Figure 57) from the aperture mechanism (6-150, Figure 57, includes an aperture; see ¶[0325]) along the vertical direction (z-axis direction, Figure 57).
With respect to Claim 11, Hu further discloses wherein the optical element (6-OE, Figure 59) is located between the aperture mechanism (6-150, Figure 57, includes an aperture; see ¶[0325]) and the prism (6-1410, Figure 58) along the vertical direction (z-axis direction, Figure 57).
With respect to Claim 12, Hu further discloses wherein the optical module (6-110, Figure 57) further has a lens (6-1228, Figure 58) disposed in the housing (6-102, Figure 57) and located between the aperture mechanism (6-150, Figure 57, includes an aperture; see ¶[0325]) and the optical element (6-OE, Figure 59).
With respect to Claim 13, Hu further discloses wherein the optical module (6-110, Figure 57) further has a driving assembly (6-DA, Figure 59) disposed on the fixed part (6-104, Figure 58) and the movable part (6-MA, Figure 61), and an electromagnetic force (electromagnetic driving force, ¶[0340]) is generated by the driving assembly (6-DA, Figure 59) to rotate the movable part (6-MA, Figure 61) relative to the fixed part (6-104, Figure 58).
With respect to Claim 14, Hu further discloses wherein the aperture mechanism (6-150, Figure 57, includes an aperture; see ¶[0325]) is located between (see Figure 58) the optical element (6-OE, Figure 59) and the prism (6-1410, Figure 58).
With respect to Claim 15, Hu further discloses further comprising a lens module (plurality of lens modules, ¶[0346]) and an image sensing module (6-1216, Figure 58), wherein the lens module is connected between the optical module (6-110, Figure 57) and the image sensing module (6-1216, Figure 58) along a horizontal direction (x-axis direction, Figure 58), the optical module (6-110, Figure 57) has a prism (6-1410, Figure 58), and the lens module (plurality of lens modules, ¶[0346]) has an optical lens (6-1228, Figure 58), wherein the external light (6-L, Figure 58) is reflected by the prism (6-1410, Figure 58) and propagates through the optical lens (6-1228, Figure 58) to the image sensing module (6-1216, Figure 58).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 6-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Hu (US 2020/0209439 A1) in further view of Hoshida et al., (Hoshida) (US 2024/0329373 A1).
With respect to Claim 6, Hu teaches the optical system as claimed in claim 3, wherein the optical element (6-OE, Figure 59) has a top portion (top of 6-OE, Figure 61) and a bottom portion (bottom of 6-OE, Figure 61), the bottom portion (bottom of 6-OE, Figure 61) faces the prism (6-1410, Figure 58).
Hu fails to teach the width of the top portion is smaller than the width of the bottom portion of the optical element.
Hu teaches an optical system and Hoshida teaches a display system in which the optical system could be used within.
Hoshida teaches the width of the top portion (t2, Figure 2) is smaller than the width of the bottom portion (t1, Figure 2) of the optical element (40, Figure 2).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective date of the invention to modify the teachings of Hu having the optical system with the teachings of Hoshida having the width of the top portion is smaller than the width of the bottom portion of the optical element for the purpose of obtaining a specific design guideline for size reduction, ¶[0045].
With respect to Claim 7, Hu further discloses wherein the optical element (6-OE, Figure 59) further has a recess (6-OE1, Figure 62) adjacent to the top portion (top of 6-OE, Figure 61).
With respect to Claim 8, Hu teaches the optical system as claimed in claim 3, wherein the optical element (6-OE, Figure 59) has a top portion (top of 6-OE, Figure 61) and a bottom portion (bottom of 6-OE, Figure 61), the bottom portion (bottom of 6-OE, Figure 61) faces the prism (6-1410, Figure 58).
Hu fails to teach the width of the top portion is greater than the width of the bottom portion of the optical element.
Hoshida teaches the width of the top portion (t1, Figure 2) is greater than the width of the bottom portion (t2, Figure 2) of the optical element (40, Figure 2).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective date of the invention to modify the teachings of Hu having the optical system with the teachings of Hoshida having the width of the top portion is greater than the width of the bottom portion of the optical element for the purpose of obtaining a specific design guideline for size reduction, ¶[0045].
With respect to Claim 9, Hu further discloses wherein the optical element (6-OE, Figure 59) further has a recess (6-OE1, Figure 62) adjacent to the bottom portion (bottom of 6-OE, Figure 61).
Claims 16-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Hu (US 2020/0209439 A1) in further view of Sun et al., (Sun hereafter) (US 2014/0340476 A1).
With respect to Claim 16, Hu teaches the optical system as claimed in claim 15, the image sensing module (6-1216, Figure 58), and the external light (6-L, Figure 58).
Hu fails to teach wherein the image sensing module has a reflecting element and an image sensor, and the external light is reflected by the reflecting element to the image sensor to generate a digital image.
Hu teaches an optical system and Sun teaches a digital holographic microscope in which the optical system could be used within.
Sun teaches wherein the image sensing module (130, Figure 9A) has a reflecting element (230, Figure 9A; see also ¶[0076]) and an image sensor (image sensor for use in 130; see also ¶[0051]), and the external light (110, Figure 9A) is reflected by the reflecting element (230, Figure 9A; see also ¶[0076]) to the image sensor (image sensor for use in 130; see also ¶[0051]) to generate a digital image (digital signal, and an image of the sample, ¶[0072]).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective date of the invention to modify the teachings of Hu having the optical system with the teachings of Sun having the image sensing module has a reflecting element and an image sensor, and the external light is reflected by the reflecting element to the image sensor to generate a digital image for the purpose of reducing the overall size of the apparatus, ¶[0074].
With respect to Claim 17, Hu further discloses wherein the lens module (plurality of lens modules, ¶[0346]) and the optical module (6-110, Figure 57) respectively have a circuit board (6-1114, Figure 61), the top surfaces of the circuit boards (6-1114, Figure 61) are situated on the same plane (x-axis direction, Figure 61) that is perpendicular (x-axis is perpendicular to z-axis direction, Figure 61) to the vertical direction (z-axis direction, Figure 61).
With respect to Claim 18, Hu teaches the optical system as claimed in claim 17 and the vertical direction (z-axis direction, Figure 57).
Hu fails to teach wherein the position of the image sensor is offset from the plane along the vertical direction.
Sun teaches wherein the position of the image sensor (image sensor for use in 130; see also ¶[0051]) is offset from the plane along the vertical direction (H-direction, Figure 57).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective date of the invention to modify the teachings of Hu having the optical system with the teachings of Sun having the position of the image sensor is offset from the plane along the vertical direction for the purpose of avoiding optical obstruction.
With respect to Claim 19, Hu teaches the optical system as claimed in claim 16, the image sensing module (6-1216, Figure 58), the lens module (plurality of lens modules, ¶[0346]) and the optical module (6-110, Figure 57) along the vertical direction (z-axis direction, Figure 57).
Hu discloses the claimed invention except for the thickness of the image sensing module is greater than the thicknesses of the lens module and the optical module along the vertical direction. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made to have the thickness of the image sensing module is greater than the thicknesses of the lens module and the optical module along the vertical direction, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involved only routine skill in the art. One would have been motivated to the thickness of the image sensing module is greater than the thicknesses of the lens module and the optical module along the vertical direction for the purposes of optical clearance and thermal dissipation. In re Antoinie, 559 F.2d 618, 195 USPQ 6 (CCPA 1977).
With respect to Claim 20, Hu teaches the optical system as claimed in claim 16, wherein the thickness of the lens module (plurality of lens modules, ¶[0346]) is greater than the thickness of the optical module (6-110, Figure 57) along the vertical direction (z-axis direction, Figure 57).
Hu discloses the claimed invention except for the thickness of the lens module is greater than the thickness of the optical module along the vertical direction. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made to have the thickness of the lens module is greater than the thickness of the optical module along the vertical direction, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involved only routine skill in the art. One would have been motivated to the thickness of the lens module is greater than the thickness of the optical module along the vertical direction for the purposes of optical clearance and thermal dissipation. In re Antoinie, 559 F.2d 618, 195 USPQ 6 (CCPA 1977).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TAMARA Y WASHINGTON whose telephone number is (571)270-3887. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thur 730-530 EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Stephone Allen can be reached at 571-272-2434. 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.
/TYW/Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2872
/BRANDI N THOMAS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Prosecution Insights