www.uspto.gov
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and TrademarkOffice
`Address; COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
`
`16/911,464
`
`06/25/2020
`
`Koji SHIBUNO
`
`AOYA.22PUSO01
`
`8030
`
`MARKD. SARALINO (PAN)
`RENNER, OTTO, BOISSELLE & SKLAR, LLP
`1621 EUCLID AVENUE
`ISTH FLOOR
`
`CLEVELAND, OH 44115
`
`NGUYEN, LUONG TRUNG
`
`2698
`
`04/02/2021
`
`ELECTRONIC
`
`Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
`
`The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
`
`Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above-indicated "Notification Date" to the
`following e-mail address(es):
`
`ipdocket @rennerotto.com
`
`PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`
`
`Disposition of Claims*
`1-7 is/are pending in the application.
`)
`Claim(s)
`5a) Of the above claim(s) ___ is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`C} Claim(s)
`is/are allowed.
`Claim(s) 1-7 is/are rejected.
`S)
`) © Claim(s)____is/are objected to.
`Cj) Claim(s
`are subjectto restriction and/or election requirement
`)
`S)
`* If any claims have been determined allowable, you maybeeligible to benefit from the Patent Prosecution Highway program at a
`participating intellectual property office for the corresponding application. For more information, please see
`http://www.uspto.gov/patents/init_events/pph/index.jsp or send an inquiry to PPHfeedback@uspto.gov.
`
`) )
`
`Application Papers
`10)¥] The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`11) The drawing(s) filed on 6/25/2020 is/are: a)(¥) accepted or b)() objected to by the Examiner.
`Applicant may not request that any objection to the drawing(s) be held in abeyance. See 37 CFR 1.85(a).
`Replacement drawing sheet(s) including the correction is required if the drawing(s) is objected to. See 37 CFR 1.121 (d).
`
`Priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119
`12) Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d)or (f).
`Certified copies:
`_—_c)L) None ofthe:
`b)L) Some**
`a)¥) All
`1.4) Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`2.2) Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No.
`3.2.) Copies of the certified copies of the priority documents have been receivedin this National Stage
`application from the International Bureau (PCT Rule 17.2(a)).
`* See the attached detailed Office action for a list of the certified copies not received.
`
`Attachment(s)
`
`1)
`
`Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)
`
`Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08a and/or PTO/SB/08b)
`2)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`3) (J Interview Summary (PTO-413)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`(Qj Other:
`
`4)
`
`PTOL-326 (Rev. 11-13)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mail Date 20210325
`
`Application No.
`Applicant(s)
`16/911,464
`SHIBUNO, Koji
`
`Office Action Summary Art Unit|AIA (FITF) StatusExaminer
`LUONG T NGUYEN
`2698
`Yes
`
`
`
`-- The MAILING DATEofthis communication appears on the cover sheet with the correspondence address --
`Period for Reply
`
`A SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD FOR REPLYIS SET TO EXPIRE 3 MONTHS FROM THE MAILING
`DATE OF THIS COMMUNICATION.
`Extensions of time may be available underthe provisions of 37 CFR 1.136(a). In no event, however, may a reply betimely filed after SIX (6) MONTHSfrom the mailing
`date of this communication.
`If NO period for reply is specified above, the maximum statutory period will apply and will expire SIX (6) MONTHSfrom the mailing date of this communication.
`-
`- Failure to reply within the set or extended period for reply will, by statute, cause the application to become ABANDONED (35 U.S.C. § 133}.
`Any reply received by the Office later than three months after the mailing date of this communication, evenif timely filed, may reduce any earned patent term
`adjustment. See 37 CFR 1.704(b).
`
`Status
`
`1) Responsive to communication(s) filed on 6/25/2020.
`C} A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/werefiled on
`
`2a)L) This action is FINAL. 2b)¥)This action is non-final.
`3)02 An election was madeby the applicant in responseto a restriction requirement set forth during the interview
`on
`; the restriction requirement and election have been incorporated into this action.
`4\0) Since this application is in condition for allowance except for formal matters, prosecution as to the merits is
`closed in accordance with the practice under Exparte Quayle, 1935 C.D. 11, 453 O.G. 213.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/911,464
`Art Unit: 2698
`
`Page 2
`
`DETAILED ACTION
`
`Notice of Pre-AlA or AIA Status
`
`1.
`
`The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first
`
`inventor to file provisions of the AIA.
`
`2.
`
`Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
`
`Priority
`
`Information Disclosure Statement
`
`3.
`
`The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 06/25/2020, 08/17/2020,
`
`11/12/2020, 01/11/2021, and 02/05/2021 areis in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97.
`
`Accordingly, the information disclosure statementis being considered by the examiner.
`
`4.
`
`The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of
`
`Specification
`
`the invention to which the claims are directed.
`
`The following title is suggested:
`
`IMAGING APPRATUS CAPABLE OF DISPLAYING A FOCUSING GRAPH TOASSIST USER DURING
`
`FOCUSING OPERATION.
`
`Claim Objections
`
`5.
`
`Claims 1-7 are objected to becauseof the following informalities:
`
`Claim 1 (lines 14-15), “a focus state” should be changed to --the focus state--.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/911,464
`Art Unit: 2698
`
`Page 3
`
`Claim 6 (lines 7-8), “a position of the focus lens” should be changed to --the position of the focus
`
`lens--.
`
`Claims 2-7 are objected as being dependentfrom claim 1.
`
`Claim 7 is objected as being dependent from claim 6.
`
`Appropriate correction is required.
`
`Claim Interpretation
`
`The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
`
`(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. — An element ina claim for a combination may be expressed as
`a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts
`in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material,
`or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
`The following is a quotation of pre-AlA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
`
`An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a
`specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim
`shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the
`specification and equivalents thereof.
`
`The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain
`
`meaningof the claim languagein light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary
`
`skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as
`
`a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AlA 35
`
`U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph,is invoked.
`
`As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong
`
`test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AlIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
`
`(A)
`
`the claim limitation uses the term “means”or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means”
`
`that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no
`
`specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/911,464
`Art Unit: 2698
`
`Page 4
`
`(B)
`
`the term “means”or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language,
`
`typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking
`
`word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
`
`(C)
`
`the term “means”or “step” or the generic placeholderis not modified by sufficient structure,
`
`material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
`
`Use of the word “means”(or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable
`
`presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AlA 35
`
`U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C.
`
`112(f) or pre-AlA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient
`
`structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
`
`Absence of the word “means”(or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the
`
`claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AlA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth
`
`paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-
`
`AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without
`
`reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
`
`Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted
`
`under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AlA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an
`
`Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or
`
`“step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AlA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph,
`
`except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
`
`8.
`
`This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but
`
`are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AlA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph,
`
`because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/911,464
`Art Unit: 2698
`
`Page 5
`
`withoutreciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not
`
`preceded bya structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “an operation member,” in claim 1.
`
`A review of the specification showsthat the following appears to be the corresponding structure
`
`described in the specification for the 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph
`
`limitation:
`
`* “operation member 130"disclosed in Figures 1, 2, Specification, paragraphs [0011], [0015]-
`
`[0016] corresponds to limitation "an operation member."
`
`Becausethis/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AlA
`
`35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph,it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure
`
`described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
`
`If applicant does not intend to havethis/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or
`
`pre-AlA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may:
`
`(1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them
`
`being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AlA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting
`
`sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim
`
`limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being
`
`interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AlIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
`
`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-AlA 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 eitherstatus.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/911,464
`Art Unit: 2698
`
`Page 6
`
`10.
`
`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.
`
`11.
`
`Claims 1-4, 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Onozawa (US
`
`7,324,151).
`
`Regarding claim 1, Onozawadiscloses an imaging apparatus, comprising:
`
`an imager(signal converter 2 which includes CCD 21, figure 1, column 2, lines 42-67) configured
`
`to capture a subject image formed via an optical system (optical system 1, figure 1, column 2, lines 42-
`
`67) including a focus lens (focus lens 11, figure 1, column 2, lines 42-67), to generate image data;
`
`a display (display unit 8, figure 1, column 2, lines 42-67) configured to display an image indicated
`
`by the image data;
`
`an operation member (operation section 9, figure 1, column 2, lines 42-67) configured to receive
`
`a user operation; and
`
`a controller (controller 4, figures 1-4, column 2, line 42 — column 3, line 58) configured to control
`
`a focusing operation for adjusting a position of the focus lens along an optical axis in the optical system
`
`according to an evaluation value for a focus state, wherein
`
`the controller is operable to cause the display to display a graph indicating the evaluation value
`
`for a focus state in each position of the focus lens (the focusing condition display is shown on the screen
`
`of the LCD 82 as a distribution graph, figures 1-3, column 3, line 60 — column 4,line 30).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/911,464
`Art Unit: 2698
`
`Page 7
`
`Regarding claim 2, Onozawa discloses wherein the controller is operable to move the focus
`
`lens according to a user operation input to the operation member with the graph being displayed
`
`(figures 1-5, column 5, line 55 — column 6,line 21).
`
`Regarding claim 3, Onozawa discloses wherein the controller is operable to cause the display to
`
`display a pointer (bar 123, figures 2-3, column 3, line 60 — column 4,line 15) indicating a current position
`
`of the focus lens in the graph.
`
`Regarding claim 4, Onozawa discloses wherein the controller is operable to cause the display
`
`to display a marker (bar 123, figures 2-3, column 3, line 60 — column 4,line 15) indicating a focus
`
`position detected by the focusing operation in the graph.
`
`Regarding claim 6, Onozawadiscloses wherein
`
`the operation member is operable to receive an instruction to reduce or increase a distance to a
`
`subject to be focused (column 3, lines 52-58); and
`
`the controller is operable to execute the focusing operation so as to shift a position of the
`
`focus lens according to the instruction (figure 5, column 3, lines 8-58; column 5, line 53 — column 6,line
`
`37).
`
`Regarding claim 7, Onozawa discloses wherein in responseto the instruction given during
`
`an operation of continuously repeating the focusing operation, the controller is operable to shift the
`
`position of the focus lens and perform the focusing operation again (figures 4-5, column 3, lines 8-58;
`
`column 5,line 53 — column 6,line 37).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/911,464
`Art Unit: 2698
`
`Page 8
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
`
`12.
`
`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-AlA 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 ofrejection if the prior art relied upon, and
`
`the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under eitherstatus.
`
`13.
`
`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 ordinaryskill in the art to which the
`claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention
`was made.
`
`14.
`
`Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Onozawa(US 7,324,151) in
`
`view of CHEONG etal. (US 2016/0103830).
`
`Regarding claim 5, Onozawafails to disclose wherein the marker includes a thumbnail image
`
`based on the image data generated by the imager at the focus position.
`
`However, CHEONG etal. discloses wherein the marker includes a thumbnail image based on
`
`the image data generated by the imager at the focus position (CHEONG etal. discloses a thumbnail
`
`correspondingto a position of the scene marker whichis closest to the current pause position 110is
`
`displayed, figures 1A-1D, 3A-3D, paragraphs [0055], [0069]-[0070)).
`
`Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinaryskill in the art before the effective
`
`filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device in Onozawa by the teaching of CHEONG etal. in
`
`orderto let a user to visually select a desire scene to be focus.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/911,464
`Art Unit: 2698
`
`Page 9
`
`Conclusion
`
`15.
`
`The prior art made of record and notrelied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's
`
`disclosure.
`
`Yumiki (US 8,350,945) discloses camera body used in an imaging device with which the state of
`
`an optical system is verified by an operation member.
`
`Ito et al. (US 2008/0002960) discloses auto-focus apparatus, image capture apparatus, and auto-
`
`focus method.
`
`FUJINO (US 2019/0018220) discloses projection and focus adjustment method.
`
`16.
`
`Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner
`
`should be directed to LUONG TRUNG NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-7315. The
`
`examiner can normally be reached on 7:30AM-5:00PM, MONDAY- THURSDAY.
`
`Examiner interviewsare 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,
`
`TWYLER HASKINS can be reached on (571) 272-7406. The fax phone number for the organization where
`
`this application or proceedingis 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 https://ppair-
`
`my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on accessto the Private PAIR system, contact
`
`the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197(toll-free). If you would like assistance from a
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/911,464
`Art Unit: 2698
`
`Page 10
`
`USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-
`
`9199 (IN USA OR CANADA)or 571-272-1000.
`
`/LUONG T NGUYEN/
`Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2698
`03/25/2021
`
`