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 § 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 6, 8-11, 13 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.
Claim 6 recites the limitation "the cooling body" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For examination purposes, claim 6 was interpreted to be dependent on claim 5, rather than claim 4 however, this also raises insufficient antecedent basis issue for the limitation “the printed circuit board” in line 3.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "the printed circuit board" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 9 recites the limitations: "the cooling body" in lines 1 and 4, and "the tube" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim.
Claim 10 recites the limitations: "the cooling body" in line 1, "the image sensor" and “the lens” in lines 3-4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim.
Claim 11 recites the limitation "the cooling ribs" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 13 recites the limitation “MIPI lines” in line 2, however, it is not clear what it MIPI lines stand for and should be defined.
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.
(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 1-4, 7-8, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Publication No. 2015/0312456 ("Baur").
Regarding claim 1, Baur discloses an optical sensor (1, Fig. 1) with a housing (3,4,5, Fig. 1) in which at least one sensor component (14, Fig. 1) designed for object detection (paragraph [0029]) as well as electronic components are arranged (8a, 8b, Fig. 1, paragraph [0034]), wherein at least one electronic component (8a, 8b, Fig. 1) generates an output signal in dependence upon sensor signals of the sensor component (implied, see paragraph [0034], processed signal sent to on-board vehicle data network), characterized in that sections of the housing (3,4,5, Fig. 1) consisting of heat-conductive material (aluminum, paragraph [0028]) are connected to an electronic component and/or the sensor component (14, Fig. 1) via thermal conduction layers (24, Fig. 1, paragraphs [0032], [0035]), such that heat generated therein is dissipated to the exterior via the housing (paragraphs [0008]-[0009]).
Regarding claim 2, Baur discloses the optical sensor (1, Fig. 1) according to claim 1, characterized in that the housing (3,4,5, Fig. 1) consists of a heat-conductive metallic material (aluminum, paragraph [0028]), and/or in that a thermal conduction pad or a thermal paste (24, Fig. 1) is provided as a thermal conduction layer (paragraph [0032]).
Regarding claim 3, Baur discloses the optical sensor (1, Fig. 1) according to claim 2, characterized in that the metallic material is a zinc or aluminum die-cast (paragraph [0028]).
Regarding claim 4, Baur discloses the optical sensor (1, Fig. 1) according to claim 1, characterized in that a printed circuit board (10, Fig. 1 has printed conductors, see 25, Fig. 1 and paragraph [0034], therefore it is a printed circuit board) is present as an electronic component (paragraph [0034]), the bottom of which is connected to a housing cover (22, Fig. 1) consisting of heat-conductive material (housing is made of aluminum, paragraph [0028]) or a housing wall (22, Fig. 1 is a housing wall) consisting of heat-conductive material (paragraph [0028]) via at least one thermal conduction layer (24, Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 7, Baur discloses the optical sensor (1, Fig. 1) according to claim 1, characterized in that an image sensor (14, Fig. 1) and a lens (12, Fig. 1) are present as sensor components (see Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 8, Baur discloses the optical sensor (1, Fig. 1) according to claim 7, characterized in that the image sensor (14, Fig. 1) and the lens (12, Fig. 1) are mounted on the top of [a] printed circuit board (10, Fig. 1), and/or in that the lens (12, Fig. 1) and the image sensor (14, Fig. 1) are mounted in a tube (10a, Fig. 2), which is fixed in place by means of the cooling ribs (23, Fig. 1).
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 1-3, 5-6, 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Publication No. 2010/0046173 ("Bellows") in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2015/0312456 ("Bauer").
Regarding claim 1, Bellows discloses an optical sensor (MU 150, Figs. 1-3, may include an image-based scanner, see paragraph [0010], which is an optical sensor) with a housing (105, Figs. 1-2, paragraphs [0012], [0014]) in which at least one sensor component (220, Fig. 2-3, paragraph [0021]) designed for object detection (for example, barcode or image data, paragraph [0019]) as well as electronic components (230, Fig. 3) are arranged,
wherein at least one electronic component (230, Fig. 3) generates an output signal in dependence upon sensor signals of the sensor component (implied, paragraph [0022]),
characterized in that sections of the housing (105, Figs. 1-2 can be the heat sink 110, Fig. 3, paragraphs [0012], [0014], [0021], [0023]) consisting of heat-conductive material (paragraph [0025]) are connected to an electronic component (paragraph [0013]) and/or the sensor component (220, Fig. 2, paragraph [0015]) via thermal conduction layers (245, 250, Fig. 3, paragraph [0022]), such that heat generated therein is dissipated to the exterior via the housing (105, Fig. 1, can be the heat sink, see paragraphs [0012]-[0014]).
Bellows does not explicitly disclose that the electronic component generates an output signal in dependence upon sensor signals of the sensor component.
However, Bauer discloses an optical sensor with an electronic component generates an output signal in dependence upon sensor signals of the sensor component (see paragraph [0034], processed signal sent to on-board vehicle data network).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have electronic equipment that processes and outputs the sensor signals as disclosed by Bauer in the device of Bellows in order to have a functioning device.
Regarding claim 2, Bellows in view of Bauer discloses the optical sensor according to claim 1, and Bellows further discloses characterized in that the housing (105, Fig. 1) consists of a heat-conductive metallic material (paragraphs [0012], [0014], [0021], [0023]), and/or in that a thermal conduction pad or a thermal paste is provided as a thermal conduction layer.
Regarding claim 3, Bellows in view of Bauer discloses the optical sensor according to claim 2, and Bellows further discloses characterized in that the metallic material is a zinc or aluminum die-cast (paragraph [0025]).
Regarding claim 5, Bellows in view of Bauer discloses the optical sensor according to claim 1, and Bellows further discloses characterized in that a cooling body (210, Fig. 2, paragraph [0015]) opens out on insides of housing wall segments (Fig. 2) consisting of heat-conductive material (paragraph [0025]), the cooling body (210, Fig. 2) consisting of heat-conductive material (paragraph [0017]) and being a constituent of the housing (paragraph [0016]) or being heat-conductively connected thereto, and in that the cooling body (210, Fig. 2) is in contact with at least one electronic component (230, Fig. 3) via at least one thermal conduction layer (245, 250, Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 6, Bellows in view of Bauer discloses the optical sensor according to claim [5], and Bellows further discloses characterized in that the cooling body (210, Fig. 2) is in contact with the top of [a] printed circuit board (220, 230, Fig. 2) via at least one thermal conduction layer (paragraph [0020]).
Regarding claim 15, Bellows in view of Bauer discloses the optical sensor according to claim 1, and Bellows further discloses characterized in that it is a code reader (barcode scanner, paragraphs [0012], [0019]).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bauer in view of German Patent Publication No. DE102007002839A1 ("Braun").
Regarding claim 11, Bauer discloses the optical sensor (1, Fig. 1) according to claim 4, but does not explicitly disclose that light-beam emitting light-emitting diodes, which constitute an illumination unit, are mounted on the top of the printed circuit board, wherein light-emitting diodes are arranged in recesses of the cooling ribs (17).
However, Braun discloses light-emitting diodes (1, Fig. 1) arranged in recesses of cooling ribs (see 5, Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to arranges the illumination unit on cooling ribs as disclosed by Braun in the device of Bauer in order to improve the heat dissipation of the unit.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bauer.
Regarding claim 12, Bauer discloses the optical sensor according to claim 4, but does not explicitly disclose that a computer unit forming an electronic component is mounted on the bottom of the printed circuit board, the computer unit forming an evaluation unit in which the output signal is generated.
However, the specific placement of the computer unit/electronic component is design choice, and an inherent part of an optical sensor required to have a functioning sensor. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to place the evaluation unit in any desired location in order to minimize space and improve heat dissipation of the unit.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bauer in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2023/0206732 ("Mistkawi").
Regarding claim 13, Bauer discloses the optical sensor according to claim 12, but does not disclose that the computer unit and the image sensor are connected via MIPI lines.
However, Mistkawi discloses that the computer unit and the image sensor are connected via MIPI lines (paragraph [0032]).
It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to use any communication interface desired in order to have a functioning device.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bauer in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2023/0137004 ("Huizen").
Regarding claim 14, Bauer discloses the optical sensor (1, Fig. 1) according to claim 1, but does not disclose that characterized in that the outside of the housing is painted with heat dissipation paint.
However, Huizen discloses a housing/casing that is painted or coated with thermally conductive paint (see paragraph [0186]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to coat the housing with a thermally conductive paint as disclosed by Huizen in the device of Bauer in order to enhance the heat transfer and dissipation of the heat through the thermally conductive element and to the exterior of the housing.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9-10 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include 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 invention as claimed, specifically with the features: the cooling body has cooling ribs, which radially run toward the lens enclosing the image sensor, and/or in that the tube is connected to the cooling ribs of the cooling body by a clamp connection or a screw connection; or the cooling body has centering pins which can be inserted into boreholes of the printed circuit board, wherein by means of the centering pins, the image sensor with the lens is positioned relative to a borehole in the printed circuit board, the borehole forming a camera socket, are not taught or made obvious by the prior art of record.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MONICA T. TABA whose telephone number is (571)272-1583. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9 am - 6 pm.
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, Georgia Epps can be reached at 571-272-2328. 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.
/MONICA T TABA/Examiner, Art Unit 2878
