Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/041,814

OPTICAL LENS AND CAMERA MODULE AND ASSEMBLING METHOD THEREFOR

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Sep 25, 2020
Examiner
LEE, MATTHEW Y
Art Unit
2872
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Ningbo Sunny Opotech Co., Ltd.
OA Round
8 (Non-Final)
82%
Grant Probability
Favorable
8-9
OA Rounds
2y 10m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 82% — above average
82%
Career Allow Rate
194 granted / 237 resolved
+13.9% vs TC avg
Strong +20% interview lift
Without
With
+19.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
43 currently pending
Career history
280
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
57.2%
+17.2% vs TC avg
§102
32.6%
-7.4% vs TC avg
§112
7.1%
-32.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 237 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
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 . Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on March 2nd, 2026 has been entered. Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Response to Amendment The amendments filed March 2nd, 2026 has been entered. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, see Pg. 7, Par. 1, filed March 2nd, 2026, with respect to claims 1-2, 4-5, 7-11, and 13 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of claims 1-2, 4-5, 7-11, and 13 has been withdrawn. 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 1-2, 4-5, 7-11, and 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 1 recites the limitation "the free-form surface lens contained therein" in line 16. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear as to which free-form lens this is. For examination purposes, "the free-form surface lens contained therein" is interpreted as "the first and/or second free-form surface lens contained therein". Claim 1 recites the limitation "the free-form surface lens" in line 19. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear as to which free-form lens this is. For examination purposes, "the free-form surface lens" is interpreted as "the first and second free-form surface lenses". Claim 1 recites the limitation "the free-form surface lens" in line 22. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear as to which free-form lens this is. For examination purposes, "the free-form surface lens" is interpreted as "the first and second free-form surface lenses". Claims 2, 4-5, 7-11, and 13 are rejected due to dependency upon claim 1. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-2, 4-5, 7-11, and 13 would be allowable if rewritten or amended 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. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: Regarding claim 1, Wada (US 2002/0071190) discloses an optical camera lens (Fig. 2, 4) comprising: a first camera lens (22, 24) component including a first lens barrel (24) and at least one first lens (22) mounted in the first lens barrel (22 is mounted in 24 in Fig. 2); a second camera lens (21, 23) component including a second lens barrel (23) and at least one second lens (21) mounted in the second lens barrel (21 is mounted in 23 in Fig. 2), the at least one first lens and the at least one second lens together constituting an imageable optical system (5, as shown in Fig. 2, the lenses form an imaging system), and in a direction along an optical axis of the optical camera lens, a gap is present between the first lens barrel and the second lens barrel (25 forms a gap between 23 and 24); and a connecting medium (25) adapted to fix the first camera lens component and the second camera lens component together ([0076], “an adhesive agent 25 for adhering the first lens holder 23 to the second lens holder 24”). Buchheister (US 2011/0199575) further teaches an included angle between an optical axis of the first camera lens component (Figs. 1-2, element 3) and an optical axis of the second camera lens (2) component is not zero ([0036], “Thereby, the at least two refractive optical elements are designed approximately wedge-shaped and are tilted at a random azimuth angle of at least 5.degree”, examiner interprets this to mean that the optical axis of the first and second lenses are not parallel and have an angle between the two, and can be seen in Figs. 1-2 where the optical path is not straight passing from the first to the second lens), wherein the at least one first lens includes a first free-form surface lens ([0043], “at least two of the optical system surfaces of the at least two approximately wedge-shaped refractive optical elements, tilted in the beam path, are designed as free-form surfaces”), the at least one second lens includes a second free-form surface lens ([0043], “at least two of the optical system surfaces of the at least two approximately wedge-shaped refractive optical elements, tilted in the beam path, are designed as free-form surfaces”), and facial form directions of the first and second free-form surface lenses complement each other (as shown by the optical paths in Figs. 1-2, the facial forms of 2 and 3 complement one another). Zhou (US 2014/0285905) further teaches wherein the first camera lens component (Fig. 3, 101) and/or the second camera lens component (102) has an identifier that characterizes facial form direction information of the free-form surface lens contained therein ([0097], “a set of alignment features or orientation indicators identifying at least one freeform surface reference axis (e.g., an x- and/or a y-axis) transverse to a thickness profile”). Wang (US 2017/0176705) further teaches wherein relative positions of the first camera lens component (111C) and the second camera lens component (112C) are adjusted ([0100], “enable the first lens element 111C to be adjusted along multiple directions and angles, so that the accuracy of the adjusting process is ensured”). However, the prior art of Wada, Buchheister, Zhou, and Wang, taken either singularly or in combination with any other prior art fails to disclose or fairly suggest the following: “make a difference between an actual reference direction of the free- form surface lens and a reference direction determined by an optical design to be not greater than 0.05 degree, the reference direction determined by the optical design characterizing the facial form direction information of the free-form surface lens”. Claims 2, 4-5, 7-11, and 13 would be allowed due to dependency. Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.” Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW Y LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-3526. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 am - 5:00 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, Pinping Sun can be reached at (571) 270 - 1284. 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. /MATTHEW Y LEE/Examiner, Art Unit 2872 9 March 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 25, 2020
Application Filed
Aug 11, 2023
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Nov 20, 2023
Response Filed
Dec 08, 2023
Final Rejection — §112
Mar 14, 2024
Request for Continued Examination
Mar 21, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Apr 02, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Jul 08, 2024
Response Filed
Jul 16, 2024
Final Rejection — §112
Oct 24, 2024
Request for Continued Examination
Oct 28, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Nov 15, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Feb 20, 2025
Response Filed
May 20, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Aug 25, 2025
Response Filed
Nov 27, 2025
Final Rejection — §112
Mar 02, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Mar 06, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 10, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601888
LENS MODULE AND PROJECTION DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12601857
METAMATERIAL DEVICES FOR OPTICAL ABSORPTION, DISPERSION AND DIRECTIONAL SENSING
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12601930
SOLAR LENS WITH SUPER COLOR ENHANCING PROPERTIES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12601889
IMAGING LENS ASSEMBLY, CAMERA MODULE AND ELECTRONIC DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12601928
DETERMINING A PROGRESSIVE LENS OPTICAL DESIGN
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

8-9
Expected OA Rounds
82%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+19.5%)
2y 10m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 237 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow 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