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
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on 01/05/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-9, 11-15, 18-19, 23 and 27-29 remain pending in the application. Claim 7 has been amended and claims 1-6, 23 and 27-29 were previously withdrawn.
Examiner Notes
Examiner cites particular columns and line numbers in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested that, in preparing responses, the applicant fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner.
Priority
As required by e M.P.E.P. 201.14(c), acknowledgement is made of applicant’s claim for priority based on National Stage entry of application PCT/CN2019/101274, International Filing Date of 08/19/2019 that claims foreign priority to CN 201811171784.9, filed 10/09/2018 and claims foreign priority to CN 201821631668.6, filed 10/09/2018.
Receipt is acknowledged of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
However, to overcome a prior art rejection, applicant(s) must submit a translation of the foreign priority papers in order to perfect the claimed foreign priority because said papers has not been made of record in accordance with 37 CFR 1.55. See MPEP § 201.15.
Drawings
The applicant’s drawings submitted are acceptable for examination purposes.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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 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 7-9 and 11-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chang et al. (hereafter Chang, of record, see IDS dated 02/02/2022) US 20110058265 A1 in view of Sato US 5754350 A(of record) and further in view of Shirotori US 20180372984 A1.
In regard to independent claim 7, Chang teaches (see Figs. 1-2) and optical camera lens (i.e. as fixed focus lens module for camera, see Abstract, paragraphs [02-04, 10-13], as depicted in Figs. 1-2) characterized by comprising:
an integrated lens barrel (e.g. lens module 100, see Abstract, paragraphs [02, 06, 10-12]) comprising:
a cylindrical body having an inner side surface and a central axis (tubular lens barrel 10 with inner surface on first open end side 11 to other second end side 13 and center axis 0-0’, Figs. 1-2, paragraphs [06-12]); and
an inner extension portion (annular protrusion 111, Figs. 1-2, paragraphs [06-12]), wherein the inner extension portion extends from the inner side surface to the central axis and the middle of the inner extension portion has a light through hole (i.e. as 111 extending towards center axis with middle annular light opening, Figs. 1-2, paragraphs [06-12]), and
the inner extension portion divides the inner side surface into a first section and a second section (i.e. as inner surface of 10 on 11 side and on 13 side, Figs. 1-2, paragraphs [06-12]), and a top surface of the inner extension portion and the first section form a first groove (i.e. as object side groove of 111 and 11 with first lens 20,30 arranged in object side groove 111, 11 on object side of 10 with adhesive 90, Figs. 1-2, paragraphs [06-12]), and a bottom surface of the inner extension portion and the second section form a second groove (i.e. as image side groove of bottom side 111 and 13 side of 10 with second lens 40 arranged in image side groove of 111 and 13 side of 10, Figs. 1-2, paragraphs [06-12]),
a first lens group including a single first lens or multiple first lenses assembled together by integrating or bonding between the multiple lenses (i.e. as first lens group 20, 30 with lens 30 arranged and integrated in 20 on object side groove 111, 11 on object side of 10, Figs. 1-2, paragraphs [06-12]),
and there is a gap between the inner side surface of the first section and an outer side surface of the first lens group (i.e. as gap 80 between the inner side surface of 11 and outer side surface of first lens group 20,30, as depicted in Figs. 1-2, paragraphs [11-12]),
a second lens group including at least one second lens (i.e. as second lens group 40 with lenses 41, 42, 43, paragraphs [10-12]), the second lens group bearing against the bottom surface of the inner extension portion and being placed in the second groove (i.e.40 in image side groove and bearing against bottom surface side of 111 and 13 side of 10, see Figs. 1-2, paragraphs [06-12]) , and the first lens group and the second lens group together forming an imageable optical system (i.e. presumably as 20, 30 and 20, 30 also with 40 lenses form lens barrel with lenses of the fixed focus lens module of camera for capturing quality images, paragraphs [04, 06-12]); and
a first glue material located on a lower surface of the first lens group and the top surface of the inner extension portion (i.e. as adhesive 90 applied on a lower surface (on the side(s)) of fist lens group 20, 30 and top i.e. object side of protrusion 111, as depicted in Figs. 1-2, paragraphs [06-12]).
But Cheng is silent that the first section has a notch that penetrates a body of the first section
and extends from bottom to top of the first section in a direction parallel to the central axis, and that the notch is configured to completely expose a side of the first lens group in a direction perpendicular to the central axis (i.e. as gap 80 around wall 24 of 22-30 and between 24 and 110 penetrates the body of the first section 11 and does extend from bottom to top of the first section in the direction parallel to the optical/central axis 00” and exposes the side of lens 20,30, but is not in direction perpendicular to the optical axis 0’0, see Fig. 1-2, paragraphs [4,6-12]).
However, Sato teaches in the same field of invention of a lens supporting device (see Figs. 1-4, Title, Abstract, col. 1 lines 6-8, 33-col. 2 line 34, col. 4 lines 19-26, 66-col. 5 line 59, col. 6 lines 14-62, including supporting device that supports lens to lens frame) and further teaches that the first section has a notch that penetrates a body of the first section and also extends from bottom to top of the first section in a direction parallel to the central axis (i.e. as front end (rear side in Figs. 1-4) of support frame 50 with front part of circular supporting surface 50f that is supporting lens L11 includes groove(s)/cutouts, teeth 50e,52 between sections of 50f and 50d, that penetrate body of front part 50f,d and extend from bottom to top of front part of 50f,d that supports L11 in direction parallel to the optical/central axis O, as depicted in Figs. 1-4, col. 4 lines 19-26, 66-col. 5 line 59, col. 6 lines 14-62) and that the notch is configured to completely expose a side of the first lens group in a direction perpendicular to the central axis (i.e. as grooves 50e completely exposes side of the lens L11 perpendicularly to the optical axis O , Figs. 1-4, col. 4 lines 19-26, 66-col. 5 line 59, col. 6 lines 14-44, and which also provides that the adhesive can be poured via grooves so that the lens HL can be firmly fixed to the lens frame 50, so the process of mounting the lens to the lens frame can be completed simply by inserting the lens in the lens frame, and further so that the adjuster with engaging projections can be inserted through 52,52e from the outside of camera to provide lens adjustment (e.g. for zoom) after lens is focused on an object to be photographed, during assembling or an adjustment of the lens, col. 6 lines 14-62, col. 8 lines 26-28).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the tubular lens barrel 10 inner surface on first open end side (11) with gap/groove/cutout that extends from bottom to top of the first section/open end side in a direction parallel to the optical axis to include notch/grooves in the body of the inner surface first opens side and that completely expose the side surface of the lens (20,30) perpendicularly to optical axis (0’) according to teachings of Sato in order to provide that adhesive can be poured via grooves so that the lens can be firmly fixed to the lens frame, and that the process of mounting the lens to the lens frame can be completed simply by inserting the lens in the lens frame, and also so that the adjuster with engaging projections can be inserted through notches/teeth from the outside of camera to provide lens adjustment (zoom) after lens is focused on an object to be photographed, or during adjustment for assembling the lens, or other adjustment of the lens (see Sato col. 6 lines 14-62, col. 8 lines 26-28).
In addition, Cheng does not specify that first glue material is located between a lower surface of the first lens group and the top surface of the inner extension portion (i.e. as adhesive 90 is applied on lower surface (on the side(s)) of fist lens group 20, 30 and top i.e. object side of protrusion 111, but not between them, as depicted in Figs. 1-2, paragraphs [06-12]).
However, Shirotori teaches in the same field of invention of a lens unit and method of manufacturing (see Figs. 1-10, Title, Abstract, paragraphs [06-20, 36-42, 45-50,58-65,75-87]), including lens unit 1, cylinder 3 with lenses 2 (e.g. 21-26),lens holder 4 including lens 24, paragraphs [36-42, 45-52,58-65,73-87], Figs. 1-5) and further teaches that first glue material is located between a lower surface of the first lens group and the top surface of the inner extension portion (i.e. as the adhesive 99 is located between lower surface of lens 24 and top surface of projection part 52 of holder 4, e.g. Figs. 2-3,5,10, paragraphs [36-42, 45-52,58-65,73-87], providing that any deformation and the like that accompanies press-fitting, can be avoided and the fixation of lens 24 can be additionally reinforced by fixing the gap with the adhesive, while capillary action in the gap S makes it possible to prevent the adhesive 99 from spreading to the effective surface of the image-side lens surface 24be.g. paragraphs [47,81,83,87]).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the lower surface of lens and top surface of protrusion of lens module of Cheng to include adhesive between those surfaces according to teachings of Shirotori in order to provide that the fixation of the lens can be additionally reinforced by fixing the gap with the adhesive, while allowing the capillary action in to make it possible to prevent the adhesive from spreading to the effective surface of lens, as additional fixation thus avoids any deformation and the like that can accompany press-fitting (see Shirotori, e.g. paragraphs [47,81,83,87]).
Regarding claim 8, the Chang -Sato combination teaches the invention as set forth above, and Chang teaches (see Figs. 1-2) that the cured first glue material supports and fixes the first lens group and the integrated lens barrel (i.e. as the adhesive 90 supports and fixes the first lens group 20, 30 in first groove 111 and 11 of 10, Figs. 1-2, paragraphs [06-12]), so that a relative position of the first lens group and the second lens group is maintained at a relative position determined by an active calibration based on an imaging result of the optical system (i.e. as due to gap 80 between 24 of 20 and inner wall 110 of 11, 10, relative positioning and alignment between 20,30 and 40 is actively accomplished, see paragraphs [11-12], Figs. 1-2, where is it noted that the further limitations of claim regarding relative position determined by an active calibration based on an imaging result of the optical system are directed to method steps of making the device, and it could have been made using an alternative method such as interferometry, laser or passive alignment or with external optical system. The method limitations are not germane to patentability pursuant to MPEP §2112.02, since it has been held that “'[E]ven though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process.' In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (citations omitted).”).
Regarding claim 9, the Chang -Sato combination teaches the invention as set forth above, and Chang teaches (see Figs. 1-2) that the first section has a ring shape with a notch in a top view (i.e. as given that the 10 is a lens barrel that is tubular with first section 11 open end accommodating first tubular lens barrel 20 with first lens 30, as depicted in Figs. 1-2, paragraphs [10-12], and due to combination with Sato, has closed ring shape below the modification with grooves (e.g. corresponding to lower sections of 52, 50f of 50) in the first section of 11, see also Figs. 1-4 of Sato).
Regarding claim 11, the Chang -Sato combination teaches the invention as set forth above, and Chang teaches (see Figs. 1-2) that the top surface of the cylindrical body is bonded with a light shielding plate(i.e. as top surface of 10 bonded with top plate 21,21a with open end of 20, see Figs. 1-2, paragraphs [11-12]), and the light shielding plate forms a diaphragm (i.e. as open end plate 21 of 20 forms a diaphragm with e.g. inside diameter D1, Figs. 1-2, paragraphs [11-12]), and no glue material is filled between the light shielding plate and the first lens group (i.e. as adhesive is between 110 and 24, but not between 21,21a and 30, Figs. 1-2, paragraphs [11-12]).
Regarding claim 12, the Chang -Sato combination teaches the invention as set forth above, and Chang teaches (see Figs. 1-2) that the first lens group includes an optical region and a structural region surrounding the optical region (i.e. as 20, 30 includes optical region of lens 30 corresponding e.g. with opening of 21,21a and D1, and the surrounding lens flange region of 30 and/or side of barrel 20, see Figs. 1-2, paragraphs [10-12]), and a top surface of the structural region is bonded with a light shielding plate (i.e. as top surface of flange portion of 30, side(s) of 20 are bonded with top plate 21 with 21a open end, see Figs. 1-2, paragraphs [10-12]), and the light shielding plate forms a diaphragm (i.e. as open end plate 21 of 20 forms a diaphragm with e.g. inside diameter D1, Figs. 1-2, paragraphs [11-12]), and no glue material is filled between the light shielding plate and the top surface of the cylindrical body (i.e. as adhesive is between 110 and side wall 24, but not between 21,21a and top surface of 10, see Figs. 1-2, paragraphs [11-12]).
Regarding claim 13, the Chang -Sato combination teaches the invention as set forth above, and Chang teaches (see Figs. 1-2) that the first section has a notched ring shape in a top view (i.e. as first section 11 of 10, Figs. 1-2, paragraphs [06-12], is modified to include notch /grooves as per combination with grooves e.g. 50e of Sato, Figs. 1-4, col. 5 line 59, col. 6 lines 14-44 .
Regarding claim 14, the Chang -Sato combination teaches the invention as set forth above, and Chang teaches (see Figs. 1-2) that the top surface of the cylindrical body is bonded with a light shielding plate(i.e. as top surface of 10 bonded with top plate 21,21a with open end of 20, see Figs. 1-2, paragraphs [11-12]), and the light shielding plate forms a diaphragm (i.e. as open end plate 21 of 20 forms a diaphragm with e.g. inside diameter D1, Figs. 1-2, paragraphs [11-12]), and the light shielding plate has a side baffle that fits the notch (i.e. as 20 includes side baffle wall 24that fits the notch in first section 11 of 10 due to modification with 50e of Sato, see claim 7 above, Figs. 1-2, paragraphs [06-12], Figs. 1-4 of Sato), and no glue material is filled between the light shielding plate and the first lens group (i.e. as adhesive is between 110 and 24, but not between 21,21a and 30, Figs. 1-2, paragraphs [11-12]).
Regarding claim 15, the Chang -Sato combination teaches the invention as set forth above, and Chang teaches (see Figs. 1-2) that the first lens group includes an optical region and a structural region surrounding the optical region (i.e. as 20, 30 includes optical region of lens 30 corresponding e.g. with opening of 21,21a and D1, and the surrounding lens flange region of 30 and/or side of barrel 20, see Figs. 1-2, paragraphs [10-12]), and a top surface of the structural region is bonded with a light shielding plate (i.e. as top surface of flange portion of 30, side(s) of 20 are bonded with top plate 21 with 21a open end, see Figs. 1-2, paragraphs [10-12]) to form a diaphragm (i.e. as open end plate 21 of 20 forms a diaphragm with e.g. inside diameter D1, Figs. 1-2, paragraphs [11-12]), and the light shielding plate has a side baffle that fits the notch (i.e. as 20 includes side baffle wall 24that fits the notch in first section 11 of 10 due to modification with 50e of Sato, see claim 7 above, Figs. 1-2, paragraphs [06-12], Figs. 1-4 of Sato), and no glue material is filled between the light shielding plate and the top surface of the cylindrical body (i.e. as adhesive is between 110 and side wall 24, but not between 21,21a and top surface of 10, see Figs. 1-2, paragraphs [11-12]).
Claims 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chang et al. (hereafter Chang, of record, see IDS dated 02/02/2022) US 20110058265 A1 in view of Sato US 5754350 A(of record), in view of Shirotori US 20180372984 A1, and further in view of Chou (of record) US 20190235140 A1.
Regarding claim 18, the Chang -Sato combination teaches the invention as set forth above, and Chang teaches (see Figs. 1-2) that the first lens group includes an optical region and a structural region surrounding the optical region (i.e. as 20, 30 includes optical region of lens 30 corresponding roughly e.g. with opening of 21,21a and D1, and the surrounding lens flange region of 30 and/or side of barrel 20, see Figs. 1-2, paragraphs [10-12]), and an outer surface of the structural region is attached with a light shielding layer (i.e. as outer surface of flange portion of 30, is attached with top plate 21, 21a open end, see Figs. 1-2, paragraphs [10-12]), but Chang is silent that the top surface of the structural region is higher than the top surface of the integrated lens barrel.
However, Chou teaches in the same field of invention of imaging lens assembly includes a dual molded optical element (see Figs. 1-8, Abstract, paragraphs [02, 05-08, 38-49]) and further teaches that the top surface of the structural region is higher than the top surface of the integrated lens barrel (i.e. as the structural region of front lens/light transmitting portion 411, 511 that is covered with light blocking layer 430,530 has top surface that is higher than top surface of integrated lens barrel 413,513, see Figs. 4-5, paragraphs [95-102, 103-108], providing that generation of the stray light can be reduced effectively, and warpage of the overly thin optical effective section caused by the shrinking of the light absorbing portion can be avoided, e.g. paragraphs [38-49]).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to adapt and modify the top surface of front lens under the cover (21) of Chang to be higher than the top surface of integrated lens barrel according to teachings of Chou where the structural region of front lens/light transmitting portion that is covered with light blocking layer has the top surface that is higher than top surface of integrated lens barrel, in order to provide that generation of the stray light can be reduced effectively, and the warpage of the thin optical effective section caused by the shrinking of the light absorbing portion can be avoided, (see Chou paragraphs [38-49]).
Regarding claim 19, the Chang -Sato combination teaches the invention as set forth above, and Chang teaches (see Figs. 1-2) the light shielding layer shields visible light and transmits invisible light in a specific wavelength band (i.e. as inner barrel 20 and front plate end 21 are made of plastic with open diameter D1 opening for light to enter the lens 30, 40, shielding visible light, and can transmit some invisible light in some specific, unspecified range, see paragraphs [11-13], as depicted in Figs. 1-2) and the invisible light in the specific wavelength band is the light that triggers the curing reaction of the first glue material (i.e. as due to materials of 21, 21a, and since is it noted that the further limitations of claim regarding invisible light in the specific wavelength band is the light that triggers the curing reaction of the first glue material are directed to method steps of making the device, and it could have been made using an alternative method such as thermal setting, or injection molding. The method limitations are not germane to patentability pursuant to MPEP §2112.02, since it has been held that “'[E]ven though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process.' In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (citations omitted).”).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed in the Remarks dated 01/05/2026 with respect to claim 7 have been 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.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARIN PICHLER whose telephone number is (571)272-4015. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30am -5:00pm.
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, Thomas K Pham can be reached on (571)272-3689. 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.
/MARIN PICHLER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872