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
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) 1-3, 5-13, 15, 16 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kato US 2021/0124142 in view of Kitamura et al. US 2023/0156923.
Regarding claim 1, Kato teaches an operation ring comprising: a ring member (paras. 0023, 0052 and Fig. 5: teaches MF ring 21); a pattern serving as an indicator of a rotation operation is formed on the inner peripheral surface (paras. 0051, 0054-0056 and Fig. 4-5: teaches plated reflection pattern 21p used for rotation detection).
Kato doesn’t teach:
a first recess portion that is formed in the ring member; and plating that is applied to the first recess portion, wherein an inclined part is formed in the first recess portion, a plurality of the first recess portions are formed on an inner peripheral surface of the ring member, and the plating is applied to the plurality of first recess portions.
Kitamura teaches a first recess portion that is formed in the ring member (paras. 0035, 0041 and Fig. 4b: non-penetrating hole 4 formed in resin base material 2); and plating is applied to the first recess portion (para. 0040 and Fig. 3: plated part 3 applied to the hole’s inner wall and filling its interior), and wherein an inclined part is formed in the first recess portion (Fig. 3 and para. 0037: teaches tapered sidewall of hole 4). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to form Kitamura’s tapered holes within Kato’s reflective regions 21a and plate those holes to improve plating adhesion through the anchoring effect as expressly taught by Kitamura para. 0049, 0051, while preserving Kato’s intervening law-reflection regions 21b.
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Kato teaches the operation ring according to claim 1, and Kitamura further teaches wherein the inclined part is inclined in an inner direction with respect to a radial direction at an inclination angle of 5° or more and 30° or less (para 0037, Fig. 3: teaches tapered recesses having a diameter decreasing gradually toward the back of the non-penetrating hole, and Table 1, Examples 5, 6 shows a taper angle of 49 degree, and therefore, each wall inclines approximately at 49/2 = 24.5 degree, which it is withing the claimed range).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Kato teaches the operation ring according to claim 1, except wherein the inclined part has a curved shape. Kitamura depicts rounded sloping transitions between the raised floor portions and adjoining troughs inside groove 102, beneath plating 103a/103b (Figs. 8a-8b, see also para 0033). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to implement Kato’s plated reflection portions using Kitamura’s conventional laser formed, plating filled resin grooves, including their depicted curved inclined portions, Kato expressly identifies laser processing and plating as an MID method for forming its reflection pattern (para. 0055-0056), while Kitamura identifies laser formed grooves filled by plating as conventional MID construction (paras. 002, 0079). Applying known construction at Kato’s repeated reflection portions would predictably produce plated recesses having curved inclined parts and a circumferential pattern indicating ring rotation.
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Kato teaches the operation ring according to claim 1, and Kato further teaches wherein, in the pattern, portions to which the plating is applied are disposed at an equal interval in a circumferential direction of the operation ring (Fig. 4 and para. 0054: teaches reflection portions 21a and low reflection portions 21b that are alternately formed at equal pitches P1=P2 in the rotation direction of the MF ring 21).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Kato teaches the operation ring according to claim 5, and Kato further teaches alternating reflection portions and lower reflection portions having equal P1 = P2 (see para 0054 and Fig. 4), and Kato discloses a pitch of about 0.1 mm (see para 0056), but does not disclose wherein the equal interval is an interval of 0.2 mm or more and 0.3 mm or less. However, Kato teaches that narrower pitches increase rotation detection accuracy and that narrow pitches create manufacturing difficulties (see para 0057). Thus, pitch is recognized result effective variable. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to select width P1 and P2 within the claimed range through routine adjustment of the pattern dimensions to balance the required rotation detection resolution against ease of manufacture.
Regarding claim 7, Kato teaches an operation ring comprising: a ring member (para. 64, Fig. 6: MF ring 321); a first recess portion that is formed in the ring member (para. 64 and Fig. 6: concaved portion 321r); and plating that is applied to the first recess portion (paras. 0055-0056, 60, 64, Fig. 6: plated reflection pattern 321p inside recess 331r).
Kato doesn’t teach: wherein an inclined part is formed in the first recess portion, the first recess portion has a first surface part that is located radially outward with respect to an inner peripheral surface of the ring member, and a second recess portion that is recessed radially outward with respect to the first surface part is formed.
Kitamura teaches wherein an inclined part is formed in the first recess portion (the inclined outer sidewall of groove 102 shown in Fig. 8b), the first recess portion has a first surface part that is located radially outward with respect to an inner peripheral surface of the ring member, and a second recess portion that is recessed radially outward with respect to the first surface part is formed (Fig. 8b: depicts groove 102 supplies the first recess; a top surface of a rising ridge in its uneven floor supplies the first surface part, and an adjacent deeper trough supplies the second recess). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to implement Kato’s recessed reflection pattern using Kitamura’s conventional MID technique of laser forming a resin groove and plating that groove. As the modification supplies known manufacturing implementation for Kato’s recessed reflective coating, producing the groove profile.
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Kato teaches the operation ring according to claim 7, and Kitamura further teaches wherein the second recess portion is a groove portion formed at an end part of the first surface part in a circumferential direction (see annotated figure below).
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image1.png
441
726
media_image1.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox (Second recess portion)][AltContent: textbox (1st surface part/1st recess portion)]
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Kato teaches the operation ring according to claim 7, and Kitamura further teaches wherein the second recess portions are formed at both end parts of the first surface part in a circumferential direction.
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image1.png
441
726
media_image1.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox (Second recess portion formed on both end of the first surface)]
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Kato teaches the operation ring according to claim 8, and Kitamura further teaches wherein the second recess portion includes a position at which a surface including the first surface part and the inclined part intersect with each other.
[AltContent: textbox (Inclined surface)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Position at which a surface including the first surface part and the inclined part intersect)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: connector]
PNG
media_image1.png
441
726
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Kato teaches the operation ring according to claim 7, and Kitamura further teaches wherein the inclined part is inclined in an inner direction with respect to a radial direction at an inclination angle of 5° or more and 30° or less (para 0037, Fig. 3: teaches tapered recesses having a diameter decreasing gradually toward the back of the non-penetrating hole, and Table 1, Examples 5, 6 shows a taper angle of 49 degree, and therefore, each wall inclines approximately at 49/2 = 24.5 degree, which it is withing the claimed range).
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Kato teaches the operation ring according to claim 7, except wherein the inclined part has a curved shape. Kitamura depicts rounded sloping transitions between the raised floor portions and adjoining troughs inside groove 102, beneath plating 103a/103b (Figs. 8a-8b, see also para 0033). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to implement Kato’s plated reflection portions using Kitamura’s conventional laser formed, plating filled resin grooves, including their depicted curved inclined portions, Kato expressly identifies laser processing and plating as an MID method for forming its reflection pattern (para. 0055-0056), while Kitamura identifies laser formed grooves filled by plating as conventional MID construction (paras. 002, 0079). Applying known construction at Kato’s repeated reflection portions would predictably produce plated recesses having curved inclined parts and a circumferential pattern indicating ring rotation.
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Kato teaches the operation ring according to claim 7, and Kitamura further teaches wherein, in the first recess portion, a dimension of the first surface part is smaller than a dimension in a circumferential direction of the ring member, which is a dimension of an inlet portion in contact with the inner peripheral surface of the ring member.
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Dimension of 1st surface part)][AltContent: textbox (Circumferential direction is greater than dimension of the first surface part)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image1.png
441
726
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 15, Kato teaches a lens device (see Figs. 1-2 and paras. 0017-119: lens device 50) comprising: an operation ring (fig. 2 and para 0023: MF ring 21 (operation member)); an optical system (see Fig. 2: details of the optical system); and an electric zoom mechanism that drives a zoom lens group that is a part of the optical system (para. 20, 30-31: teaches zoom ring mechanism to move the lens groups), in accordance with rotation of the operation ring (see para 0045: MF ring 21 operates with zoom ring rotation), wherein the operation ring includes: a ring member (paras. 0023, 0052 and Fig. 5: teaches MF ring 21).
Kato fails to teach: a first recess portion that is formed in the ring member; and plating that is applied to the first recess portion, and wherein an inclined part is formed in the first recess portion.
Kitamura teaches a first recess portion that is formed in the ring member (paras. 0035, 0041 and Fig. 4b: non-penetrating hole 4 formed in resin base material 2); and plating is applied to the first recess portion (para. 0040 and Fig. 3: plated part 3 applied to the hole’s inner wall and filling its interior), and wherein an inclined part is formed in the first recess portion (Fig. 3 and para. 0037: teaches tapered sidewall of hole 4). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to form Kitamura’s tapered holes within Kato’s reflective regions 21a and plate those holes to improve plating adhesion through the anchoring effect as expressly taught by Kitamura para. 0049, 0051, while preserving Kato’s intervening law-reflection regions 21b.
Regarding claim 16, Kato teaches the lens device according to claim 15, wherein the optical system includes at least the zoom lens group, a first lens group (Fig. 1 and para 0018: depicts plurality of lens groups), a filter (para 0026: ND filter), and a stop (para 0019: aperture 16), the filter has a maximum outer diameter portion larger than a maximum outer diameter portion of the first lens group and is located on a subject side with respect to the first lens group, the zoom lens group is located between the first lens group and the stop and on the subject side with respect to the stop, and the pattern is located between the maximum outer diameter portion of the first lens group and the maximum outer diameter portion of the filter (see Figs.2 and 5: pattern 221p is located inside the ring 21, and ring 21 is located on the outside or interchangeable lens 50, which infers pattern is located between the maximum outer diameter portion of the first lens group and the maximum outer diameter portion of the filter).
Regarding claim 19, Kato teaches a method of manufacturing an operation ring (paras. 0052, 0055, 0056: teaches molding resin MF ring 21 and forming its reflective pattern using MID laser processing and plating). However, Kato doesn’t teach the comprising method: forming a first recess portion in a ring member; forming an inclined part in the first recess portion; and applying plating to the first recess portion.
Kitamura teaches forming a first recess portion in a ring member (para. 41, Figs. 4a-4b: laser boring non penetrating hole 4 in resin base material 2), forming an inclined part in the first recess portion (paras. 0037, 0051: forming hole 4 tapered sidewall, its diameter decreasing toward the back of the hole), and applying plating to the first recess portion (paras. 0042-0043; Figs. 4d-4f: teaches applying plating 3a to the hole walls to fill the hole). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Kato’s manufacturing method by laser forming Kitamura’s tapered holes within the regions designated as reflective portions 21a to improve adhesion of the reflective plating as taught in paras. 0049, 0051 of Kitamura.
Claim(s) 4 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kato and Kitamura as applied to claims 1 and 7 above, and further in view of Tanioka JPH11194255.
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Kato teaches the operation ring according to claim 1, except for wherein a material of the operation ring is a carbon fiber composite material.
Tanioka teaches that zoom operation ring is made of carbon fiber material (see page 6, 4th para: teaching zoom operation ring 4 made of carbon fiber). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the ring of Kato by manufacturing form carbon fiber to prevent deformation of the operation ring.
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Kato teaches the operation ring according to claim 7, except for wherein a material of the operation ring is a carbon fiber composite material.
Tanioka teaches that zoom operation ring is made of carbon fiber material (see page 6, 4th para: teaching zoom operation ring 4 made of carbon fiber). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the ring of Kato by manufacturing form carbon fiber to prevent deformation of the operation ring.
Claim(s) 17 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kato US 2021/0124142 in view of Hokari et al. US 2022/0082750.
Regarding claim 17, Kato teaches an operation ring comprising: a ring member (para. 0064 and Fig. 6: MF ring 321); a first recess portion that is formed in the ring member (Fig. 6 and para 64: concaved portion of 321r formed around the inner surface of ring 321); and plating that is applied to the first recess portion (para. 0064: teaches reflection pattern 321p is formed inside concaved portion 321r, paras. 0055-0056: teaches forming the reflection pattern by plating).
Kito fails to teach wherein an inner peripheral surface of the ring member, and the plating are located on the same surface.
Hokari teaches metal reflectors 14 embedded in grooves C of substrate 11, with their exposed surfaces flash with the top surface of substrate 13 (see at least Figs. 1-2). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to apply Hokira’s embedded metal reflective plated portions to Kato’s pattern 321p, to improve scratch resistance and surface durability as expressly taught by Hokari in para. 0064.
Regarding claim 18, the combination of Kato and Hokari the operation ring according to claim 17, and Kato further teaches wherein a plurality of the first recess portions are formed on the inner peripheral surface of the ring member (paras. 0051-0053, 0060, 0064, Figs. 4 and 6: grooves are formed at the reflective portion positions of patter 321p on the ring’s inner peripheral surface), and the plating is applied to the plurality of first recess portions and a pattern serving as an indicator of a rotation operation is formed on the inner peripheral surface (paras. 0051, 0054-0056 and Fig. 4-5: teaches plated reflection pattern 21p used for rotation detection).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20180321458 A1: teaches manual focusing (MF) ring that detects a rotation of an operating ring.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EPHREM ZERU MEBRAHTU whose telephone number is (571)272-8386. The examiner can normally be reached 10 am -6 pm (M-F).
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.
/EPHREM Z MEBRAHTU/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Prosecution Insights