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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-10 are pending.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “lens driving device” must be shown or the feature canceled from the claim. No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference characters "2" and "3" have both been used to designate the circuit board (Figs. 1 and 2). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “2” has been used to designate both the circuit board (Fig. 1) and the elastic bracket (Fig. 2). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: “33” (Fig. 7). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested: Image Stabilization Driving Device.
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: in paragraph [0012], line 1, the term “coves” is objected to because it does not appear to be the correct term. The examiner suggests that the term be changed to “covers”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 2, the examiner suggests that the term “coves” be changed to “covers”. Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-10 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.
Regarding claim 1, the limitation “a lens driving device” is indefinite because there is no lens claimed and the driving device does not appear to be configured to drive a lens. Rather, the driving device drives the image sensor to move relative to the case along a direction perpendicular to the optical axis direction (claim 1, lines 12-13). For purposes of examination, the limitation is being interpreted as “an image stabilization driving device”.
Regarding claims 2-10, the claims inherit the deficiencies of claim 1 through their dependencies.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3 and 7-9 would be objected to, once the above stated 35 USC 112(b) rejection is corrected, 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.
Claim 3 would be objected to for at least the reason that the prior art fails to teach or suggest that the case is provided with an avoidance groove penetrating therethrough along a direction perpendicular to the optical axis direction, and the flexible extension portion passes through the avoidance groove to be electrically connected to an external circuit, as generally set forth in claim 3, the invention including the totality of the particular limitations in claim 1, from which claim 3 depends.
Claim 7 would be objected to for at least the reason that the prior art fails to teach or suggest that the elastic bracket comprises a bracket body provided at an inner side of the upper lid, and a first mounting portion and a second mounting portion extending from two ends of the bracket body towards the circuit board assembly, and the circuit board assembly is fixed to the first mounting portion, the second mounting portion is fixed to the bottom lid, as generally set forth in claim 7, the invention including the totality of the particular limitations recited in claims 1, 5, and 6, from which claim 7 depends.
Claims 8-9 would be objected to for at least the reason that they depend from claim 7, which also would be objected to.
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, 4-6, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2024/0397205 to Wang et al. (hereafter Wang).
Regarding claim 1, Wang discloses an image stabilization driving device (see at least the abstract), comprising: a case (see at least Fig. 5 and paragraph [0092], where base 100 is a case); a magnet assembly fixed to the case (see at least Fig. 5 and paragraph [0111], where magnets 421, 422, and 423 are mounted in the base 100); a circuit board assembly suspended in the case (see at least Figs. 3-5 and paragraph [0083], where movable assembly 200 includes a main circuit board 21); an elastic bracket supporting the circuit board assembly at the case (see at least Fig. 5 and paragraph [0092], where suspension assembly suspends the movable assembly within the base); a driving coil assembly stacked and fixed to the circuit board assembly and electrically connected to the circuit board assembly (see at least Figs. 3-5 and paragraph [0111], where 411, 412, and 412 are coils fixed to the circuit board); and an image sensor fixed to the circuit board assembly (see at least Figs. 3-5 and paragraph [0083], where image sensor 22 is disposed on the circuit board), wherein the case is provided with an opening penetrating through the case along an optical axis direction of the image sensor, the image sensor is opposite to the opening along the optical axis direction (see at least Fig. 19 and paragraph [0155]-[0156], where the base has an accommodating cavity 10 that is an opening that penetrates through the base along an optical axis direction of the image sensor), and the magnet assembly and the driving coil assembly are opposite to each other along the optical axis direction, to drive the image sensor to move relative to the case along a direction perpendicular to the optical axis direction (see at least Fig. 11 and paragraph [0126]); wherein the circuit board assembly comprises a first circuit board stacked and fixed to the elastic bracket, and a second circuit board connected to the first circuit board, the driving coil assembly is fixed to a side of the first circuit board facing the magnet assembly (see at least Fig. 5), and the first circuit board is electrically connected to an external circuit by means of the second circuit board (see at least Fig. 9 and paragraph [0119], where 53 is a connection circuit board)); and wherein the first circuit board is a printed circuit board (PCB), the second circuit board is a flexible circuit board (FPC), and the first circuit board and the second circuit board are formed as an integral structure (see at least paragraph [0100]).
Regarding claim 4, Wang discloses all of the limitations of claim 1.
Wang also discloses that the driving coil assembly comprises a coil substrate stacked and fixed to the first circuit board, and a driving coil fixed to a side of the coil substrate facing the magnet assembly (see at least Figs. 3-5).
Regarding claim 5, Wang discloses all of the limitations of claim 1.
Wang also discloses that the magnet assembly works together with the driving coil assembly to drive the image sensor to move along a first direction and a second direction that are perpendicular to the optical axis direction, and the first direction is perpendicular to the second direction (see at least Figs. 15-16 and paragraphs [0138]-[0151], where the coils and magnets work together to move the image sensor); and wherein the lens driving device further comprises an anti-collision assembly fixed to the first circuit board, the anti-collision assembly comprises a first anti-collision block fixed to each of two opposite sides of the first circuit board along the first direction, and a second anti-collision block fixed to each of two opposite sides of the first circuit board along the second direction (see at least Fig. 13 and paragraph [0133]).
Regarding claim 6, Wang discloses all of the limitations of claim 5.
Wang also discloses a connection member, wherein two ends of the connection member are fixed to the first anti-collision block and the second anti-collision block (see at least Fig. 13, where the circuit board itself is a connection member between the anti-collision blocks).
Regarding claim 10, Wang discloses all of the limitations of claim 1.
Wang also discloses that the first circuit board is provided with a through hole penetrating therethrough along the optical axis direction (see at least Fig. 3 and paragraph [0086], where 211 is a through hole), the lens driving device further comprises a sensor bracket that is fixed to the first circuit board and covers the through hole, and the image sensor is fixed to a side of the sensor bracket facing the opening and is arranged in the through hole (see at least Fig. 3 and paragraph [0086], where circuit board 221 is a sensor bracket and image sensor 22 is fixed to a size of the sensor bracket facing the opening).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
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.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2024/0397205 to Wang et al. (hereafter Wang).
Regarding claim 2, Wang discloses all of the limitations of claim 2.
Wang does not specifically disclose that a thickness of the first circuit board is greater than a thickness of the second circuit board.
However, 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). Among the benefits of a thickness of the first circuit board being greater than a thickness of the second circuit board include optimizing the strength and flexibility of the circuit boards.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Wang so that a thickness of the first circuit board is greater than a thickness of the second circuit board for the purpose of optimizing the strength and flexibility of the circuit boards.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
WO 2023/051043 to Wang et al. corresponds to the US Patent Application Publication US 2024/0397205 cited in the rejections above.
CN221553362U to Xu et al. is cited in the International Search Report for the corresponding PCT application of the present application.
CN117041701A to Liu et al. is cited in the International Search Report for the corresponding PCT application of the present application.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ADAM W BOOHER whose telephone number is (571)270-0573. The examiner can normally be reached M - F: 8:00am - 4:00pm.
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, 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.
/A.W.B./ Examiner, Art Unit 2872
/STEPHONE B ALLEN/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2872
