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 .
DETAILED ACTION
2. This is the initial Office Action based on the application filed on April 21, 2025. The Examiner acknowledges the following:
3. Claims 1 – 8 were filed by Applicant.
4. The drawings filed on 04/21/2025are accepted by the Examiner.
5. Current claims 1 – 8 are pending and they are being considered for examination.
Information Disclosure Statement
6. The IDS document filed on filed on 04/21/2025 are acknowledged by the Examiner.
Priority
7. Priority data is based on a PCT application PCT/JP2023/034889, filed on 09/26/2023, which refers to a previous Japanese patent application JP-2022-172428, filed on 10/27/2022. Certified copies were provided to the office on 05/27/2025.
Double Patenting
8. The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the "right to exclude" granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed.
Cir. 1993); In re Langi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Omum,
686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619
(CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d)
may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claim 1 is provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of copending Application No. 19/185454. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claim 1 of the instant application is an obvious variation of claim 1 of copending Application No.19/185454.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Claim 1 is provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of copending Application No. 19/185454. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claim 1 of the instant application is an obvious variation of claim 1 of copending Application No.19/185454.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Claim 5 is provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of copending application 19/185454. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claim 5 of the instant application is an obvious variation of claim 1 of copending application 19/185454.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about aTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
9. 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.
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 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by “Yoshiro Aoki et al., WO-2022/059279 A1, hereinafter Aoki / “ Aoki et al., US2023/0221601 A1”. (Note: Aoki art is from the IDS and it is provided by Applicant – The WO-2022/059279 A1 is used here because of its publication date which is prior to the instant application and US 2023/022160 A1 is used as a translation of the WO).
As for Claims 1 and 5:
Aoki teaches,
A camera module (Fig 1, camera module 10 or first camera. See [0104; 0131]. Fig 94, camera module CM. See [00673; 0674]) comprising: an imaging device (Fig 1, camera module 1a includes an imaging device or image sensor 3. See [0131; 0133]. Fig 94, imaging device 3. See [0674; 0675]);
a liquid crystal panel (Fig 1, liquid crystal panel PNL. See [0105 – 0106]. Fig 94, liquid crystal panel PNL. See [0674 – 0676]) including an aperture pattern that allows light to be made incident on the imaging device (Figs 8 – 11 show the liquid crystal including an incident light control area PCA of the liquid crystal panel PNL. Fig 8 shows a dot pattern which is marked to the light-shielding layer BM and different incident control areas TA1, TA2, TA3 and it also includes light-shielding areas LSA1, LSA2, LSA3 as for allowing the light to be incident on the imaging device. See [0182 – 256]), and comprising a liquid crystal layer and a driver driving the liquid crystal layer (Fig 2, Fig 3, liquid crystal layer LC. See [0117; 0145]. The liquid crystal layer LC is driven by a voltage (electric field) generated between the pixel electrode PE and the common electrode CE. A capacitor CP is formed, for example, between an electrode having the same potential as the common electrode CE and an electrode having the same potential as the pixel electrode PE (See [0146]). Fig 3, the wiring substrate includes an IC chip, which includes a display driver that output a signal needed for image display (See [0148])) to form the aperture pattern;
a lens located between the imaging device and the liquid crystal panel (Fig 1, the optical system includes at least one lens located between the imaging device and the liquid crystal pane. See [0100; 131]); and a controller (Fig 41, the electronic device 100 includes a control circuit CC, a storage medium SM, optical sensor SN, an IC chip 6, liquid crystal panel PNL, light source EM1 and a camera 1. See [0537; 0538]) calculating a distance to a subject in an image, based on light that is transmitted through the aperture pattern of the liquid crystal panel and the lens and that is made incident on the imaging device (The electronic device 100 obtains a plurality of types of image data and it obtains information of the distance from an imaging device 3 to a subject based on the image data (See [0466]). The control circuit CC can store the image information including a distance from the camera 1a to the subject and as a result the control circuit CC can derive/measure the distance from the camera 1a to the subject based on two types of information acquired by the camera 1a (See [0553 – 0555])), wherein
the liquid crystal panel is arranged to surround the lens (The imaging device acquires information of light transmitted through the incident light control area of the liquid crystal panel and the lens (See [0100]). Since the claim language does not specify or describe how the liquid panel is arranged to surround the lens. Nothing in Aoki precludes it from having the liquid crystal panel or liquid crystal layers to be placed/arranged as to surround the lens. For example, as seen in Fig 3 the cameras 1a and 1b are surrounded by the liquid crystal layers LC.).
As for last limitation of claim 5 “wherein the liquid crystal panel is arranged to cover the lens along a surface of the lens” (Aoki Fig 94 shows the liquid crystal panel PNL covering the lens barrel (optical system 2) or in other words, it is covering the lenses L. See [0669 – 0672]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
10. 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.
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 of this title, 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 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over “Yoshiro Aoki et al., WO-2022/059279 A1, hereinafter Aoki / “ Aoki et al., US2023/0221601 A1”, in view of “Tetsuyuki Miyawaki et al., US 2021/0385394 A1, hereinafter Miyawaki”. (Note: both arts are from the IDS document).
Regarding Claim 2:
The rejection of claim 1 is incorporated herein. Aoki teaches claim 1 but it is silent about the claim 2 limitations, which in the same field of endeavor is taught by Miyawaki. Miyawaki teaches a solid-state imaging apparatus comprising: a pixel array section including a plurality of pixels arranged with a pixel pitch, the pixel array section having a central portion and an outer peripheral portion, the pixel pitch being smaller at a greater distance away from the central portion toward the outer peripheral portion, wherein the pixel array section has a pixel arrangement including a concentric arrangement and, further comprising: a pixel drive line configured to transmit a drive signal for driving the pixels; and an output signal line configured to output, to an outside of the pixels, a pixel signal generated by the pixels, wherein the pixel drive line is disposed on a per unit-of-pixel basis, the unit-of-pixel including pixels that include the plurality of pixels and are arranged on a circumference of a predetermined radius, and the output signal line is disposed along a direction of the radius of a concentric circle having the circumference on which the pixels are arranged. His invention is applicable to, for example, solid-state imaging apparatuses and the like suited for photographing by using a wide-angle lens such as a fisheye lens used in a 360-degree panoramic camera. It teaches that an image taken by photographing using a wide-angle lens such as a fisheye lens for use in a 360-degree panoramic camera provides poorer quality in sense of resolution of the outer peripheral portion of an image than that of the central portion of the image. To correct for it, an imaging element in which resolution in its light receiving region is made different between the central portion and the outer peripheral portion of the region (See [0002; 0003]).
As for claim 2 limitations , wherein the lens includes 360 degrees in a horizontal direction in a capturing range, Miyawaki teaches in Fig 1 that the solid-state imaging apparatus 1 is such that the arrangement of pixels in the pixel array section 11 is one suitable for photographing by using a fisheye lens (wide-angle lens) for use in a 360-degree panoramic camera (See [0053]).
By modifying Aoki with the teaching of Miyawaki, using a fisheye lens, which allows for the camera to be used in a 360-degree panoramic view, that configuration makes it possible to improve sense of resolution at outer peripheral portion of the image photographed by using a fisheye lens (See Miyawaki [0057]).
Regarding Claim 6:
The rejection of claims 1, 5 and 2 is incorporated herein. Claim 6 has a similar disclosure as claim 2 but as applied to claim 5 instead. Therefore, claim 6 is rejected under a similar rationale as claim 2. See claim 2 rejection for more detail.
Allowable Subject Matter
11. Claims 3 – 4 and 7 – 8 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim; however, it would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
12. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure
1. Y. Aoki et al., US 2025/0244639 A1 - it includes three common inventors and the same assignee. It teaches a camera module comprising: an imaging device; a liquid crystal panel having an incident light control area; and a lens located between the imaging device and the liquid crystal panel, wherein the liquid crystal panel has a plurality of electrodes located in the incident light control area, and the imaging device acquires information of light transmitted through the incident light control area of the liquid crystal panel and the lens, wherein the plurality of electrodes include a first electrode located in a first area of the incident light control area and a second electrode located in a second area different from the first area in the incident light control area, and the second area is located to be shifted from the first area, wherein the liquid crystal panel sets the second area in a transmissive state during a period in which the first area is set to a non-transmissive state, and sets the second area in the non-transmissive state during a period in which the first area is set in the transmissive state and, wherein the incident light control area includes a first annular area including a plurality of first divided areas divided into a plurality of areas in a circumferential direction and a second annular area including a plurality of second divided areas divided into a plurality of areas in the circumferential direction and surrounded by the first annular area, the plurality of electrodes are provided independently for each of a plurality of divided areas including the plurality of first divided areas and the plurality of second divided areas, and are electrically independent for each of the plurality of divided areas, one divided area or a plurality of adjacent divided areas including the one divided area among the plurality of divided areas is a first area, and another divided area or a plurality of adjacent divided areas including the another divided area among the plurality of divided areas is a second area, wherein the incident light control area further includes a circular area surrounded by the second annular area, and one of the plurality of electrodes is provided independently in the circular area and electrically independent of a rest of the plurality of electrodes and, wherein the liquid crystal panel sets the entire second annular area in a transmissive state or a non-transmissive state during a period in which the entire first annular area is set in the non-transmissive state, and sets the entire second annular area in the transmissive state or the non-transmissive state during a period in which the entire first annular area is set in the transmissive state.
Contact
13. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARLY S.B. CAMARGO whose telephone number is (571)270-3729. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8:00-5:00 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Lin Ye can be reached on 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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MARLY S CAMARGO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2638
Prosecution Insights