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 .
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.
Applicant has amended the title of the invention to overcome the objection to the specification provided in the previous office action.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 06/18/2026 with respect to claim 13 has been considered but is not persuasive.
Please refer to the following office action, which clearly sets forth the reasons for non-persuasiveness.
Applicant argues SEO in view of OH fail to teach “wherein the plurality of pulling yokes comprises a first portion facing the first polarity region, and a second portion spaced apart from the first portion and facing the second polarity region”.
Examiner notes as discussed in the rejection below OH clearly teaches in figures 2, 11a, and paragraphs 0119 – 0120 that “wherein the plurality of pulling yokes comprises a first portion facing the first polarity region, and a second portion spaced apart from the first portion and facing the second polarity region.
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:
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.
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 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SEO (US PgPub No. 2022/0155652) in view of OH (US PgPub No. 2019/0141219).
Regarding claim 13, SEO teaches a camera module (abstract; camera module) comprising: a lens module comprising at least one lens (figure 2 item 1500 including items 1510 and 1700); a frame (figure 2 item 1400) which the lens module is coupled (figure 2 item 1500 held into item 1700 and into item 1400) being movable in a direction perpendicular to the optical axis (paragraphs 0056 - 0067; in a direction perpendicular to the optical axis direction; correct shaking during imaging by moving the lens module 200 in a direction, perpendicular to the optical axis (Z axis)); a carrier in which the above frame is accommodated (figure 2 item 1300); and a plurality of magnets disposed on the frame (paragraph 0094; the upper magnetic material may be first and second magnets 1420 and 1720 for driving optical image stabilization provided in the frame 1400 or the lens holder 1700), and the carrier includes the pulling yokes (figure 2 item 1300 includes figure 2 items 1350 and 1421 and 1450, and 1721); wherein the plurality of magnets comprises a first polarity region and a second polarity region having different areas along the longitudinal direction thereof (figure 2 please see figure below; plurality of magnets comprises a first polarity region N and a second polarity region S having different areas along the longitudinal direction thereof).
PNG
media_image1.png
850
706
media_image1.png
Greyscale
However, SEO fails to clearly teach a plurality of pulling yokes spaced apart in a longitudinal direction of the plurality of magnets disposed on the carrier, and wherein the plurality of pulling yokes comprises a first portion facing the first polarity region, and a second portion spaced apart from the first portion and facing the second polarity region. OH, on the other hand teaches a plurality of pulling yokes spaced apart in a longitudinal direction of the plurality of magnets disposed on the carrier, and wherein the plurality of pulling yokes comprises a first portion facing the first polarity region, and a second portion spaced apart from the first portion and facing the second polarity region.
More specifically, OH teaches a plurality of pulling yokes spaced apart in a longitudinal direction of the plurality of magnets disposed on the carrier (figure 11A; items 225 extending in first and second directions in relation to items 521a), and wherein the plurality of pulling yokes comprises a first portion facing the first polarity region, and a second portion spaced apart from the first portion and facing the second polarity region (figures 2, 11a, and paragraphs 0119 – 0120).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to incorporate the teachings of OH with the teachings of SEO to improve movement of the system elements, additionally OH teaches in at least paragraphs 0044, 0114 - 0115, and 0142 - 0143 that using the system will result in reduced weight, therefore improving the drive in SEO while reducing the weight of the system.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 14 - 16 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter for claim 14: “wherein the first portion has a longer length than the second portion in the longitudinal direction of the plurality of magnets” in combination with the other limitations in the claim and the parent claim is not discussed or suggested in any of the prior art that was searched.
Regarding claims 15 - 16, these claims are also objected to as being dependent from objected claim 14.
Claims 1 – 12 are allowed.
The following is an examiner's statement of reasons for allowance:
Regarding independent claim 1, the prior art of record fails to teach or fairly suggest a lens module comprising at least one lens; a frame to which the lens module is coupled being movable in a direction perpendicular to an optical axis; a carrier in which the frame is accommodated; and a plurality of magnets disposed on the frame and comprising a first polarity region and a second polarity region[[,]]; and a plurality of pulling yokes disposed on the carrier to face each of the plurality of magnets, wherein the first polarity region and the second polarity region are disposed in a longitudinal direction of the plurality of magnets, wherein the plurality of pulling yokes comprises a first portion facing the first polarity region and a second portion facing the second polarity region, wherein the first portion and the second portion are spaced each other in the longitudinal direction of the plurality of magnets, and wherein the first portion and the second portion each comprise a first direction extension portion extending in a longitudinal direction of the plurality of magnets, and a second direction extension portion extending in a thickness direction of the plurality of magnets; in combination with other elements of the claim.
Regarding claims 2 – 12; claims 2 – 12 are allowed as being dependent from allowed independent claim 1.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
MORI (US PgPub No. 20220075201) teaches a camera system with magnets and carrier movement.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Usman A Khan whose telephone number is (571)270-1131. The examiner can normally be reached on M - Th 5:30 AM - 2 PM, F 5:30 AM - Noon.
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 on (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.
Usman Khan
/USMAN A KHAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2637
07/07/2026
Prosecution Insights