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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 12/23/2025 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The present office action is made in response to the amendment filed by applicant on 12/01/2025. It is noted that in the amendment, applicant has made changes to the claims. There is not any change being made to the abstract, the drawings and the specification.
Regarding the claims, applicant has amended claims 1, 6 and 15.
Response to Arguments
The amendments to the claims as provided in the amendment of 12/01/2025, and applicant's arguments provided in the mentioned amendment, pages 7-10, have been fully considered and yielded the following conclusions.
A) Regarding to the claims, because applicant has not added/canceled any claim into the application thus the pending claims are still claims 1-15 in which claims 1-3, 5-7, 9-10 and 14-15 are examined in the present office action, and claims 4, 8 and 11-13 have been withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to nonelected Inventions II and III.
Applicant should note that the non-elected claims 4, 8 and 11-13 will be rejoined if the linking claim 1 is later found as an allowable claim.
B) Regarding the rejections of claims 1-3, 5-7, 9-10 and 14-15 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as set forth in the office action of 05/13/2025, the amendments to the claims as provided in the amendment of 12/01/2025, and applicant’s arguments provided in the mentioned amendment, page 7, have been fully considered and are sufficient to overcome the rejections of claims 1-3, 5-7, 9-10 and 14-15 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as set forth in the mentioned office action.
However, the amendments to the claims raise new rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, to claims as provided in the present office action.
C) Regarding the rejection of claims 1-3, 5-7, 9-10 and 14-15 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schaub (US Patent No. 6,040,943) In view of Magnusson (US Publication No. 2014/0270638) and Ohashi (US Patent No. 5,737,125) as set forth in the office action of 10/01/2025, the amendments to the claims as provided in the amendment of 12/01/2025, and applicant’s arguments provided in the mentioned amendment, pages 7-10, have been fully considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
6. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
7. Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, because the disclosure, as originally filed, does not provide support for an optical device in the form of a thin lens having a substrate with a plurality of nanostructures formed thereon wherein the plurality of nanostructures are formed on an image side of the thin lens, see claim 1 on lines 22-23 and on an object side of the thin lens as recited in claim 3 on line 2 and line 3.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
8. 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.
9. The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
10. Claims 1-3, 5-7, 9-10 and 14-15, as best as understood, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schaub (US Patent No. 6,040,943, of record) in view of Magnusson (US Publication No. 2014/0270638, of record) and Yamagata et al (US Patent No. 6,349,000).
Schaub discloses a lens system for use in an optical device such as a camera, see column 1.
a) Regarding to present claims 1 and 15, the lens system as described in columns 2-3 and shown in figs. 1-2 comprises the following features:
a1) a first optical device (12) configured to receive light from an object/screen and focus light transmitted through the first optical device (12) at a location/focal point which is dependent upon an angle at which the light incident on an object-side surface (12a) of the first optical device, see fig. 1;
a2) a second optical device (14) disposed on the downstream of and at a location with respect to a location of the first optical device (12) such that light transmitted through the first optical device (12) incident onto an object-side surface (14a) of the second optical device (14) and focuses at a location/focal length that is dependent on a position on the second optical device (14);
a3) a third optical device (16) disposed on the downstream of and at a location with respect to a location of the second optical device (14) such that light transmitted through the second optical device incident onto an object-side surface (16a) of the third optical device (16) and focus on an imaging plane (24) after passing through the third optical device (16);
a4) the first to third optical devices (12, 14, 16) constituted the lens system and each lens has a first lens surface and a second lens surface wherein at least one of the surfaces comprises a diffractive surface to correct axial and lateral aberrations that occurs in the remaining optical devices, see column 2 and claims 1 and 3-5, for example;
a5) regarding to the feature of “thin lens” for the third optical device, it is noted that each of the optical devices (12, 14, 16) is considered as a “thin” lens. Applicant should note that while the claim recites that the third optical device is a thin lens; however, there is not any specific/limitation regarding to the so-called “thin” of the lens;
a6) Schaub teaches that the object side surface (16a) of the third optical device, i.e., the lens (16), is preferred to have a diffractive surface, see column 2, lines 50-53, thus the third optical device (16), which is a thin lens with a diffractive optical surface formed on its object-side surface, is configured to adjust a delay in phase distribution of the light transmitted through the optical devices based on its physical features such as shape, cross section areas, heights, intervals defined between two adjacent orbicular zones, see columns 2-3 and fig. 2 in which the dimension of the gratings, the heights, the shapes of the gratings on the object side surface (16a) of the third optical device (16) are different in a central potion and a peripheral portion. It is also noted that diffractive surface may be placed/formed on another surface such as an image side surface of the second lens, see column 2 on lines 53-55; and
a7) the lens system provided by Schaub is used in an optical device such as a camera having a detector (24) which is understood as an optical device for detecting/measuring light incident on an image plane of the detector.
There are two features missing from the lens system provided by Schaub as follow:
First, Schaub does not clearly disclose that the thin lens comprises a substrate with a plurality of nanostructures/gratings being formed on the substrate wherein the plurality of nanostructures are separated arranged with intervals and the refractive index of the nanostructures is larger than the refractive index of the substrate and that of the medium outside the plurality of nanostructures; and
Second, the diffractive surface is the image side surface of the third lens.
Regarding to the first feature missing from the lens system provided by Schaub, it is noted that an optical element comprises a substrate with a plurality of nanostructures/gratings being formed on the substrate wherein the plurality of nanostructures are separated arranged with intervals and the refractive index of the nanostructures is larger than the refractive index of the substrate and that of the medium outside the plurality of nanostructures is known to one skill in the art as can be seen in the optical element provided by Magnusson.
In particular, Magnusson discloses an optical element (100) having a substrate (110) and a diffractive layer (120) formed on one surface of the substrate. The diffractive layer (120) comprises a plurality of nanostructures separately arranged with an interval between two adjacent nanostructures, see paragraph [0039] and fig. 1. Regarding the refractive index, the refractive index of the diffractive layer (120) is larger than the refractive index of the substrate (110) and the refractive index of the medium, outside the plurality of nanostructures, see paragraph [0048] and example 1 described in paragraph [0067].
Thus, it would have been obvious to one skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the third optical device (16) which has a diffractive profile on a surface thereof by using/making a diffractive surface having a plurality of nanostructures on a substrate wherein the plurality of nanostructures are separated arranged with intervals and the refractive index of the nanostructures is larger than the refractive index of the substrate and that of the medium outside the plurality of nanostructures as suggested by Magnusson to couple light incident on the nanostructures into at least one waveguide mode which resonate within the nanostructures.
While the combined product provided by Schaub and Magnusson does not disclose that the diffractive profile in formed on an image side of the third optical device; however, formation a diffractive profile on either an object-side or an image-side of a lens would have been obvious to one skill in the art as disclosed by Yamagata et al.
In particular, Yamagata et al discloses an optical device having a set of lenses and teaches that the object side or the image side of a lens is a diffractive surface, see column 48 on lines 42-47. Thus, it would have been obvious to one skill I the art before the effective filing date of the invention to select/make either the object side or the image side of a lens as a diffractive lens surface as suggested by Yamagata et al for the purpose of correcting chromatic and geometric aberrations of the optical system to meet a particular application.
b) Regarding to present claim 2, in the combined product provided by Schaub, Magnusson and Yamagata et al, the diffractive element (100) having a substrate to which a plurality of diffractive elements/structure are formed on the substrate wherein the diffractive element is integrally formed with an adjacent optical device is provided by Magnusson, see example 2 in paragraph [0075] and fig. 7 which discloses that the diffractive element is integrally formed with a cover.
c) Regarding to present claim 3, the diffractive optical surface is formed on an object side surface (16a) of the third optical device (16) as provided by Schaub or on an image side of the combined product as suggested by Yamagata et al.
d) Regarding to present claim 5, the lens system of Schaub is used/operated in an operating wavelength of a band of wavelengths having at least visible band or infrared band or ultraviolet band, see column 2.
e) Regarding to present claims 6 and 7, any light distribution passing through an optical device, i.e., a lens as shown in optical devices (12, 14, 16) comprises a wavefront with a particular phase and an amplitude distribution which is either in a convergent or divergent form.
f) Regarding to present claim 9, the diffractive optical surface comprises a plurality of nanostructures which each has a rectangular parallelepiped shape, see Magnusson in fig. 1.
g) Regarding to present claim 10, the diffractive optical surface of the optical element as provided by Magnusson having grating period with dimensions is equal to or less than 3/4 of a light wavelength, see paragraphs [0044]-[0046].
h) Regarding to present claim 14, the first optical device (12) in the lens system of Schaub is a thin lens as that of the second and third optical devices, see Schaub in claim 1.
11. Claims 1-3, 5-7, 9-10 and 14-15, as best as understood, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boku et al (Japanese reference No. 11-352397) in view of Magnusson (US Publication No. 2014/0270638, of record).
Boku et al discloses a lens system for use in an image pickup device, see pages 1-2 of the English Machine translation attached with the present office action.
a) Regarding to present claims 1 and 15, the lens system as described in page 15 and shown in fig. 18 comprises the following features:
a1) a first optical device (1) configured to receive light from an object/screen and focus light transmitted through the first optical device (1) at a location/focal point which is dependent upon an angle at which the light incident on an object-side surface (r1) of the first optical device, see fig. 18;
a2) a second optical device (2) disposed on the downstream of and at a location with respect to a location of the first optical device (1) such that light transmitted through the first optical device (1) incident onto an object-side surface (r3) of the second optical device (2) and focuses at a location/focal length that is dependent on a position on the second optical device (2);
a3) a third optical device (3) disposed on the downstream of and at a location with respect to a location of the second optical device (2) such that light transmitted through the second optical device incident onto an object-side surface (r5) of the third optical device (3) and focus on an imaging plane (5) after passing through the third optical device (3);
a4) the first to third optical devices (1-3) constituted the lens system and each optical device is in the form of a lens having a first lens surface and a second lens surface wherein a diffractive surface is formed on the image side lens surface (60) of the third lens to correct axial and lateral aberrations that occurs in the remaining optical devices, see page 15 and fig. 18.
a5) regarding to the feature of “thin lens” for the third optical device, it is noted that each of the optical devices (1-3) is considered as a “thin” lens. Applicant should note that while the claim recites that the third optical device is a thin lens; however, there is not any specific/limitation regarding to the so-called “thin” of the lens;
a6) Boku et al teaches that the image side surface (60) of the third optical device, i.e., the lens (3), is a diffractive surface, thus the third optical device (3), which is a thin lens with a diffractive optical surface formed on its image-side surface, is configured to adjust a delay in phase distribution of the light transmitted through the optical devices based on its physical features such as shape, cross section areas, heights, intervals defined between two adjacent orbicular zones, see English Machine translation in pages 3-5 and fig. 21 in which the dimension of the gratings, the heights, the shapes of the gratings on the image side surface (60) of the third optical device (3) are different in a central potion and a peripheral portion; and
a7) the lens system provided by Boku et al is used in an image pickup device which inherently comprises a detector for detecting/measuring light incident on an image plane of the detector.
The only feature missing from the lens system provided by Boku et al is that Boku et al does not clearly disclose that the thin lens comprises a substrate with a plurality of nanostructures/gratings being formed on the substrate wherein the plurality of nanostructures are separated arranged with intervals and the refractive index of the nanostructures is larger than the refractive index of the substrate and that of the medium outside the plurality of nanostructures.
However, an optical element comprises a substrate with a plurality of nanostructures/gratings being formed on the substrate wherein the plurality of nanostructures are separated arranged with intervals and the refractive index of the nanostructures is larger than the refractive index of the substrate and that of the medium outside the plurality of nanostructures is known to one skill in the art as can be seen in the optical element provided by Magnusson.
In particular, Magnusson discloses an optical element (100) having a substrate (110) and a diffractive layer (120) formed on one surface of the substrate. The diffractive layer (120) comprises a plurality of nanostructures separately arranged with an interval between two adjacent nanostructures, see paragraph [0039] and fig. 1. Regarding the refractive index, the refractive index of the diffractive layer (120) is larger than the refractive index of the substrate (110) and the refractive index of the medium, outside the plurality of nanostructures, see paragraph [0048] and example 1 described in paragraph [0067].
Thus, it would have been obvious to one skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the third optical device (3) which has a diffractive profile on its image side surface thereof by using/making a diffractive surface having a plurality of nanostructures on a substrate wherein the plurality of nanostructures are separated arranged with intervals and the refractive index of the nanostructures is larger than the refractive index of the substrate and that of the medium outside the plurality of nanostructures as suggested by Magnusson to couple light incident on the nanostructures into at least one waveguide mode which resonate within the nanostructures.
b) Regarding to present claim 2, in the combined product provided by Boku et al and Magnusson, the diffractive element (100) having a substrate to which a plurality of diffractive elements/structure are formed on the substrate wherein the diffractive element is integrally formed with an adjacent optical device is provided by Magnusson, see example 2 in paragraph [0075] and fig. 7 which discloses that the diffractive element is integrally formed with a cover.
c) Regarding to present claim 3, the diffractive optical surface is formed on an image side surface (60) of the third optical device (3) as provided by Boku et al.
d) Regarding to present claim 5, the lens system of Boku et al is used/operated in an operating wavelength of a band of wavelengths having at least visible band, see English Machine Translation in page 4.
e) Regarding to present claims 6 and 7, any light distribution passing through an optical device, i.e., a lens as shown in optical devices (1-3) comprises a wavefront with a particular phase and an amplitude distribution which is either in a convergent or divergent form.
f) Regarding to present claim 9, the diffractive optical surface comprises a plurality of nanostructures which each has a rectangular parallelepiped shape, see Magnusson in fig. 1.
g) Regarding to present claim 10, the diffractive optical surface of the optical element as provided by Magnusson having grating period with dimensions is equal to or less than 3/4 of a light wavelength, see paragraphs [0044]-[0046].
h) Regarding to present claim 14, the first optical device (1) in the lens system of Schaub is a thin lens as that of the second and third optical devices, see Boku et al.
Conclusion
12. The US Patent No. 5,978159 is cited as of interest in that it discloses that a diffractive surface is formed on either an object side or an image side of a lens, and the Japanese reference No. 2000-19392 is cited as of interest in that it discloses an optical system having three lenses wherein the image side surface of the third lens is a diffractive lens surface.
13. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THONG Q NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571) 272-2316. The examiner can normally be reached M - Th: 6:00 ~ 17:00.
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, STEPHONE B. ALLEN can be reached on (571) 272-2434. 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.
/THONG Q NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872