Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 01, 2026
Application No. 19/237,320

OPTICAL ELEMENT DRIVING MECHANISM

Non-Final OA §102
Filed
Jun 13, 2025
Priority
Dec 18, 2020 — provisional 63/127,746 +1 more
Examiner
HSU, AMY R
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
Actutek Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
87%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
1y 0m
Est. Remaining
85%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 87% — above average
87%
Career Allowance Rate
754 granted / 871 resolved
+26.6% vs TC avg
Minimal -1% lift
Without
With
+-1.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 3m
Avg Prosecution
9 currently pending
Career history
881
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
5.9%
-34.1% vs TC avg
§103
56.1%
+16.1% vs TC avg
§102
31.4%
-8.6% vs TC avg
§112
1.5%
-38.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 871 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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 § 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. Claims 1-4, 6-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2015/0002726 to Schmieder et al. (“Schmieder”). Regarding claim 1, Schmieder teaches an optical element driving mechanism, comprising: an outer frame (see Figure 8 reference number 802), having a top, wherein the top has a plate-like structure and is perpendicular to an optical axis (with reference to Figure 9, the top plate-like structure is shown on the left-most portion of 802, which is the top since Figure 9 is a view rotated 90 degrees with respect to Figure 8); a first optical element, movable relative to the outer frame (any of the optical elements such as reference number 904 may be a movable lens, see Figure [0080]); a fourth optical element, at least partially located in a first opening of the top (reference number 801 is the outermost lens and is partially in the opening which is within reference number 802 at the top); a third optical element, wherein a light sequentially passes through the fourth optical element and the first optical element and then is incident to the third optical element (any of the lower lenses or the image sensor may be considered the third optical element that receives light past the fourth and first optical element), wherein the fourth optical element at least partially protrudes from a first top surface of the top, a second top surface of the top faces the first optical element, and the first top surface and second top surface face opposite directions (outermost lens 801 protrudes from the top surface of the top of 802 as seen in Figures 8-9, and the second top surface facing the opposite direction is the other side of 802 that faces towards 904). Regarding claim 2, Schmieder teaches the optical element driving mechanism as claimed in claim 1, wherein the first optical element is located between the second optical element and the fourth optical element when viewed along the direction that is perpendicular to the optical axis (the first element is 904 and is between the fourth element 801 and the second element 906). Regarding claim 3, Schmieder teaches the optical element driving mechanism as claimed in claim 1, wherein the fourth optical element has a fourth optical element top side and a fourth optical element bottom side opposite to the fourth optical element top side, wherein the fourth optical element bottom side faces the first optical element, wherein the area of the fourth optical element top side is larger than the area of the fourth optical element bottom side (as seen in Figure 9). Regarding claim 4, Schmieder teaches the optical element driving mechanism as claimed in claim 1, wherein the second optical element has a second optical element top side and a second optical element bottom side opposite to the second optical element top side, wherein the second optical element top side faces the first optical element, wherein the area of the second optical element top side is smaller than the area of the second optical element bottom side (as seen in Figure 9). Regarding claim 6, Schmieder teaches the optical element driving mechanism as claimed in claim 1, further comprising a third optical element, wherein the second optical element is located between the first optical element and the third optical element when viewed along a direction that is perpendicular to the optical axis (see Figure 9). Regarding claim 7, Schmieder teaches the optical element driving mechanism as claimed in claim 6, wherein the first optical element, the second optical element, and the third optical element are arranged along the optical axis (see Figure 9). Regarding claim 8, Schmieder teaches the optical element driving mechanism as claimed in claim 6, wherein the first optical element is in active alignment with the second optical element, the second optical element is in active alignment with the third optical element, and the fourth optical element is in active alignment with the second optical element (see Figure 9 and paragraph [0084] regarding fixing the structure following an active alignment process). Allowable Subject Matter Claim 5, 9-20 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 Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AMY R HSU whose telephone number is (571)270-3012. The examiner can normally be reached 9am-5pm. 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. AMY R. HSU Examiner Art Unit 2664 /AMY R HSU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2638
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 13, 2025
Application Filed
Sep 22, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12745009
SYSTEM
2y 0m to grant Granted Sep 22, 2026
Patent 12739485
IMAGING APPARATUS
1y 11m to grant Granted Sep 15, 2026
Patent 12732676
VARIABLE FOCAL LENGTH LENS DEVICE
2y 1m to grant Granted Sep 08, 2026
Patent 12732701
CAMERA MODULE AND CONTROL METHOD OF CAMERA MODULE
2y 0m to grant Granted Sep 08, 2026
Patent 12732713
COMPUTER SYSTEM, METHOD, AND PROGRAM
1y 12m to grant Granted Sep 08, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
87%
Grant Probability
85%
With Interview (-1.2%)
2y 3m (~1y 0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 871 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month