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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (lDS) submitted on April 4, 2025, the IDS submitted on July 23, 2025, and the IDS submitted on October 3, 2025, are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97 and are being considered by the Examiner.
Preliminary Amendment
The Preliminary Amendment, filed on February 14, 2025, has been received and made of record. Claims 3, 5-7 and 9-13 were amended, claims 14-16 were cancelled, and claims 17-23 were newly added. The specification was also amended.
The Preliminary Amendment, filed on April 22, 2025, has been received and made of record. Claims 1-13 and 17-23 were amended. The specification was also amended.
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.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 3, 4, 6, 9, 17-19 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Publication No. 2011/0091198 to Hasegawa.
Regarding claim 1, Hasegawa teaches a variable aperture device for a camera module (e.g., fig. 1), comprising a base (e.g., fig. 1, element 129) having a base aperture (e.g., fig. 1, element 129c) and a pair of blade guides (e.g., fig. 1, side walls of base 129), wherein the pair of blade guides are provided on opposite longitudinal edges of the base with the base aperture in between (e.g., fig. 1), a pair of main blades (e.g., fig. 1, elements 122 and 124) guided by the pair of blade guides of the base (e.g., fig. 1), wherein the pair of main blades are slidably arranged relative to the base so as to be close to and separated from each other (e.g., figs. 1 and 3A-3F), wherein each of the main blades has a respective notch (e.g., fig. 1, elements 122d and 124d), and wherein the notches collaboratively define a central aperture (Ai) when the pair of main blades are closest to each other (e.g., fig. 3F), and collaboratively define a fixed aperture (A2) when the pair of main blades are farthest from each other (e.g., fig. 3A, associated with 129c), a pair of supplemental blades (e.g., fig. 1, elements 121 and 123) guided by the pair of blade guides of the base (e.g., fig. 1), wherein the pair of supplemental blades are slidably arranged relative to the base so as to be close to and separated from each other (e.g., figs. 1 and 3A-3F), wherein each of the supplemental blades has a respective supplemental notch (e.g., fig. 1, elements 121f and 123f), and wherein the supplemental notches collaboratively define a minimum aperture (A3) surrounding the central aperture (Ai) when the pair of supplemental blades are closest to each other (e.g., fig. 3F), and collaboratively define a maximum aperture (A4) substantially corresponding to the fixed aperture (A2) when the pair of supplemental blades are farthest from each other (e.g., fig. 3A, associated with 129c), a cover (e.g., fig. 1, element 12b) that is fixed to the base and has a cover aperture substantially corresponding to the fixed aperture (A2) (e.g., fig. 1), wherein the cover is configured to restrain the pair of main blades and the pair of supplemental blades in a space between the base and the cover (e.g., fig. 1), and an actuator (e.g., fig. 1, element 120) for moving the pair of main blades and the pair of supplemental blades relative to the base (e.g., fig. 1; [0056]), wherein each of the supplemental blades is configured to project outward (e.g., fig. 3F, aperture edge of supplement blades extend further than lateral edge of main blades, note 121f and 123f) from lateral edges of the main blades (e.g., fig. 3F, note 122d and 124d) perpendicular to the longitudinal edges of the base when the pair of main blades are closest to each other and the pair of supplemental blades are closest to each other (e.g., figs. 1 and 3F).
Regarding claim 3, Hasegawa teaches all of the limitations of claim 3 (see the 35 U.S.C. 102 rejection of claim 1, supra) including teaching wherein the actuator includes a pair of rotatable arms (e.g., fig. 1, element 120, each outward from and rotating around central axis) with a boss provided at the tip of the rotatable arms (e.g. fig. 1, elements 120a and 120c), wherein the pair of main blades have respective cam grooves (e.g., fig. 1; [0056]), and the pair of supplemental blades have respective cam grooves (e.g., fig. 1; [0056]), wherein the boss of the rotatable arms is configured to be accommodated within the cam grooves of the main blades and the cam grooves of the supplemental blades (e.g., fig. 1; [0056-59]), and wherein a rotation of the rotatable arms is converted by the cam grooves of the main blades and the cam grooves of the supplemental blades into a linear movement of the main blades and the supplemental blades (e.g., fig. 1; [0056], effect of rotation of element 120; figs. 2A-2F).
Regarding claim 4, Hasegawa teaches all of the limitations of claim 4 (see the 35 U.S.C. 102 rejection of claim 3, supra) including teaching wherein the pair of rotatable arms are rotatably supported by the base (e.g., fig. 1, when physically assembled).
Regarding claim 6, Hasegawa teaches all of the limitations of claim 6 (see the 35 U.S.C. 102 rejection of claim 3, supra) including teaching wherein when the pair of supplemental blades has moved to a closed position where the minimum aperture (A3) is collaboratively defined by the supplemental notches of the pair of supplemental blades (e.g., from fig. 2A to fig. 2F), the cam grooves of the supplemental blades are covered by the pair of main blades, and the cam grooves of the main blades are covered by the pair of supplemental blades (e.g., figs. 1 2A-2F, and 3F; covered, even if not entirely).
Regarding claim 9, Hasegawa teaches all of the limitations of claim 9 (see the 35 U.S.C. 102 rejection of claim 1, supra) including teaching wherein when the pair of main blades and the pair of supplemental blades move linearly (e.g., figs. 2A-2F), the first arm and the second arm of the pair of rotatable arms rotate in an opposite direction to each other (e.g., figs. 2A-2F).
Regarding claim 17, Hasegawa teaches an electronic device, wherein the electronic device comprises a camera module (figs. 9-11), wherein the camera module comprises a variable aperture device (e.g., fig. 1), the variable aperture device comprising a base (e.g., fig. 1, element 129) having a base aperture (e.g., fig. 1, element 129c) and a pair of blade guides (e.g., fig. 1, side walls of base 129), wherein the pair of blade guides are provided on opposite longitudinal edges of the base with the base aperture in between (e.g., fig. 1), a pair of main blades (e.g., fig. 1, elements 122 and 124) guided by the pair of blade guides of the base (e.g., fig. 1), wherein the pair of main blades are slidably arranged relative to the base so as to be close to and separated from each other (e.g., figs. 1 and 3A-3F), wherein each of the main blades has a respective notch (e.g., fig. 1, elements 122d and 124d), and wherein the notches collaboratively define a central aperture (Ai) when the pair of main blades are closest to each other (e.g., fig. 3F), and collaboratively define a fixed aperture (A2) when the pair of main blades are farthest from each other (e.g., fig. 3A, associated with 129c), a pair of supplemental blades (e.g., fig. 1, elements 121 and 123) guided by the pair of blade guides of the base (e.g., fig. 1), wherein the pair of supplemental blades are slidably arranged relative to the base so as to be close to and separated from each other (e.g., figs. 1 and 3A-3F), wherein each of the supplemental blades has a respective supplemental notch (e.g., fig. 1, elements 121f and 123f), and wherein the supplemental notches collaboratively define a minimum aperture (A3) surrounding the central aperture (Ai) when the pair of supplemental blades are closest to each other (e.g., fig. 3F), and collaboratively define a maximum aperture (A4) substantially corresponding to the fixed aperture (A2) when the pair of supplemental blades are farthest from each other (e.g., fig. 3A, associated with 129c), a cover (e.g., fig. 1, element 12b) that is fixed to the base and has a cover aperture substantially corresponding to the fixed aperture (A2) (e.g., fig. 1), wherein the cover is configured to restrain the pair of main blades and the pair of supplemental blades in a space between the base and the cover (e.g., fig. 1), and an actuator (e.g., fig. 1, element 120) for moving the pair of main blades and the pair of supplemental blades relative to the base (e.g., fig. 1; [0056]), wherein each of the supplemental blades is configured to project outward (e.g., fig. 3F, aperture edge of supplement blades extend further than lateral edge of main blades, note 121f and 123f) from lateral edges of the main blades (e.g., fig. 3F, note 122d and 124d) perpendicular to the longitudinal edges of the base when the pair of main blades are closest to each other and the pair of supplemental blades are closest to each other (e.g., figs. 1 and 3F).
Regarding claim 18, Hasegawa teaches a variable aperture device for a camera module (e.g., fig. 1), comprising a base (e.g., fig. 1, element 129) having a base aperture (e.g., fig. 1, element 129c) and a pair of blade guides (e.g., fig. 1, side walls of base 129), wherein the pair of blade guides are provided on opposite longitudinal edges of the base with the base aperture in between (e.g., fig. 1), a pair of main blades (e.g., fig. 1, elements 122 and 124) guided by the pair of blade guides of the base (e.g., fig. 1), wherein the pair of main blades are slidably arranged relative to the base so as to be close to and separated from each other (e.g., figs. 1 and 3A-3F), wherein each of the main blades has a respective notch (e.g., fig. 1, elements 122d and 124d), and wherein the notches collaboratively define a central aperture (A1) when the pair of main blades are closest to each other (e.g., fig. 3F), a pair of supplemental blades (e.g., fig. 1, elements 121 and 123) guided by the pair of blade guides of the base (e.g., fig. 1), wherein the pair of supplemental blades are slidably arranged relative to the base so as to be close to and separated from each other (e.g., figs. 1 and 3A-3F), wherein each of the supplemental blades has a respective supplemental notch (e.g., fig. 1, elements 121f and 123f), and wherein the supplemental notches collaboratively define a maximum aperture (A4) when the pair of supplemental blades are farthest from each other (e.g., fig. 3A, associated with 129c), a cover (e.g., fig. 1, element 12b) that is fixed to the base and has a cover aperture substantially corresponding to the fixed aperture (A2) (e.g., fig. 1), wherein the cover is configured to restrain the pair of main blades and the pair of supplemental blades in a space between the base and the cover (e.g., fig. 1), and an actuator (e.g., fig. 1, element 120) for moving the pair of main blades and the pair of supplemental blades relative to the base (e.g., fig. 1; [0056]), wherein the actuator includes a pair of rotatable arms (e.g., fig. 1, element 120, each outward from and rotating around central axis) with a boss provided at the tip of the rotatable arms (e.g. fig. 1, elements 120a and 120c), wherein the pair of main blades have respective cam grooves (e.g., fig. 1; [0056]), and the pair of supplemental blades have respective cam grooves (e.g., fig. 1; [0056]), wherein the boss of the rotatable arms is configured to be accommodated within the cam grooves of the main blades and the cam grooves of the supplemental blades (e.g., fig. 1; [0056-59]), and wherein a rotation of the rotatable arms is converted by the cam grooves of the main blades and the cam grooves of the supplemental blades into a linear movement of the main blades and the supplemental blades (e.g., fig. 1; [0056], effect of rotation of element 120), wherein when the pair of supplemental blades has moved to a closed position (e.g., moving to fig. 2F), where the minimum aperture (A3) is collaboratively defined by the notches of the pair of supplemental blades, the cam grooves of the supplemental blades are covered by the pair of main blades, and the cam grooves of the main blades are covered by the pair of supplemental blades (e.g., figs. 1 2A-2E, and 3F; covered, even if not entirely).
Regarding claim 19, Hasegawa teaches all of the limitations of claim 19 (see the 35 U.S.C. 102 rejection of claim 18, supra) including teaching wherein the pair of rotatable arms are rotatably supported by the base (e.g., fig. 1, when physically assembled).
Regarding claim 23, Hasegawa teaches all of the limitations of claim 23 (see the 35 U.S.C. 102 rejection of claim 18, supra) including teaching wherein when the pair of main blades and the pair of supplemental blades move linearly, the first arm and the second arm of the pair of rotatable arms rotate in an opposite direction to each other (e.g., figs. 2A-2F, see element 120).
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.
Claims 2, 10, 12 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hasegawa in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2021/0157216 to Cohen et al. (hereinafter “Cohen”).
Regarding claim 2, Hasegawa teaches all of the limitations of claim 2 (see the 35 U.S.C. 102 rejection of claim 1, supra) except for being found by the Examiner to expressly disclose wherein the pair of supplemental blades are interposed between the base and the pair of the main blades.
Nevertheless, Cohen teaches a similar aperture device in which a pair of supplemental blades are interposed between a base and a pair of the main blades (e.g., figs. 3A-3K). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to have incorporated the teaching of Cohen with the teaching of Hasegawa in order to remove spacing between blade pair via overlap instead of interlace, and reduce the potential for light infiltration and internal reflections.
Regarding claim 10, Hasegawa teaches all of the limitations of claim 10 (see the 35 U.S.C. 102 rejection of claim 1, supra) except for being found by the Examiner to expressly disclose wherein the variable aperture device further comprises a pair of secondary supplemental blades guided by the pair of blade guides of the base, wherein the pair of secondary supplemental blades are slidably arranged relative to the base so as to be close to and separated from each other, wherein each of the secondary supplemental blades has a respective secondary supplemental notch, wherein the secondary supplemental notches collaboratively define a minimum aperture (A5) surrounding the central aperture (A1) when the pair of secondary supplemental blades are closest to each other, and collaboratively define a maximum aperture (A6) surrounding or substantially corresponding to the fixed aperture (A2) when the pair of secondary supplemental blades are farthest from each other, and wherein each of the secondary supplemental blades is configured to project outward from the lateral edges of the main blades perpendicular to the longitudinal edges of the base when the pair of main blades are closest to each other, the pair of supplemental blades are closest to each other, and the pair of secondary supplemental blades are closest to each other.
Nevertheless, Cohen teaches a similar aperture device that further includes, in addition to a pair a main blades and a pair of supplemental blades, a pair of secondary supplemental blades guided by a pair of blade guides of a base (e.g., figs. 3A-3K, central blade pair), wherein the pair of secondary supplemental blades are slidably arranged relative to the base so as to be close to and separated from each other (e.g., figs. 3A-3K,), wherein each of the secondary supplemental blades has a respective secondary supplemental notch (e.g., figs. 3A-3K, central blade pairs have arcs), wherein the secondary supplemental notches collaboratively define a minimum aperture surrounding a central aperture when the pair of secondary supplemental blades are closest to each other (e.g., figs. 3F), and collaboratively define a maximum aperture surrounding or substantially corresponding to the fixed aperture when the pair of secondary supplemental blades are farthest from each other (e.g., fig. 3C), and wherein each of the secondary supplemental blades is configured to project outward from the lateral edges of the main blades perpendicular to the longitudinal edges of the base when the pair of main blades are closest to each other, the pair of supplemental blades are closest to each other, and the pair of secondary supplemental blades are closest to each other (e.g., fig. 3F). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to have incorporated the teaching of Cohen with the teaching of Hasegawa in order to create additional aperture setting options.
Regarding claim 12, Hasegawa teaches all of the limitations of claim 12 (see the 35 U.S.C. 102 rejection of claim 10, supra) except for being found by the Examiner to expressly disclose wherein the pair of secondary supplemental blades are interposed between the base and the pair of supplemental blades.
Nevertheless, Cohen teaches a similar aperture device in which a pair of secondary supplemental blades are interposed between a base and a pair of supplemental blades (e.g., figs. 3A-3K). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to have incorporated the teaching of Cohen with the teaching of Hasegawa in order to remove spacing between blade pair via overlap instead of interlace, and reduce the potential for light infiltration and internal reflections.
Regarding claim 13, Hasegawa teaches all of the limitations of claim 13 (see the 35 U.S.C. 102 rejection of claim 1, supra) except for being found by the Examiner to expressly disclose wherein the central aperture (A1) that is collaboratively defined by the notches of the pair of main blades is circular.
Nevertheless, Cohen teaches a similar aperture device teaching the blades defining circular apertures (e.g., (e.g., figs. 3A-3K). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to have incorporated the teaching of Cohen with the teaching of Hasegawa in order to create a more perfect image circle of light reaching an image sensor, smoothing the appearance of the vignette effect that would be more greatly associated with the edge meeting points of a hexagon.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5, 7, 8, 11 and 20-22 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
U.S. Patent No. 10,025,161 to Masae et al. teaches a similar aperture arrangement.
Contact
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GARY C VIEAUX whose telephone number is (571)272-7318. The examiner can normally be reached Increased Flex.
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, Lin Ye can be reached at 571-272-7372. 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.
/GARY C VIEAUX/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2638
Prosecution Insights