DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA 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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
2. 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 08/07/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
3. The applicant’s arguments (see Remarks dated 08/07/2026) have been considered, but they are moot because of the new grounds of rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
4. The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
5. Claims 1, 9, and 14 are rejected under 35 USC 103 as being unpatentable over Sik et al. (KR 20200031512 A, of record) in view of Yang et al. (KR 20190070230 A, of record).
Regarding claim 1, Sik discloses a lens assembly, comprising:
a lens barrel ([0060]);
lenses accommodated in the lens barrel ([0060], L1 and L2); and
a spacer (Figs. 22 & 28, S1) disposed between neighboring lenses among the lenses (Fig. 22), and having an incident hole (Fig. 28, 60),
wherein an inner side surface (Fig. 28, 40) of the spacer surrounding the incident hole (Fig. 28, 40 surrounds 60) includes a first inner side surface (Fig. 28, bottom of 40) and a second inner side surface (Fig. 28, top of 40) facing each other (Fig. 28), and a third inner side surface (Fig. 28, left side of 40; see Image 1 below) and a fourth inner side surface (Fig. 28, right side of 40; Image 1) facing each other (Fig. 28),
wherein an exterior side surface of the spacer surrounding the incident hole includes a first exterior side surface corresponding to the first inner side surface (Fig. 28, 53), a second exterior side surface corresponding to the second inner side surface (Fig. 28, 54), a third exterior side surface corresponding to the third inner side surface (Fig. 28, 51), and a fourth exterior side surface corresponding to the fourth inner side surface (Fig. 28, 52),
wherein the third and fourth exterior side surfaces are curved (Fig. 28),
wherein each of the first inner side surface and the second inner side surface are straight (Fig. 28), and each of the third inner side surface and the fourth inner side surface includes a concavely curved region (Fig. 28 & Image 1), facing a center of the spacer (Fig. 28),
wherein the first inner side surface, the second inner side surface, the third inner side surface, and the fourth inner side surface have radii of curvature R1, R2, R3, and R4 (Fig. 28), respectively, and
wherein the lens assembly satisfies the expressions:
R1 = R2 (Fig. 28);
R3 ≠ R1 (Fig. 28); and
R4 ≠ R1 (Fig. 28).
Sik fails to disclose wherein the spacer includes a cutout portion that extends through the spacer from a first exterior surface of the spacer adjacent to a first lens of the neighboring lenses to a second exterior surface of the spacer adjacent to a second lens of the neighboring lenses, and a width of the cutout portion at the first exterior surface is different from a width of the cutout portion at the second exterior surface, wherein the width of the cutout portion is a distance spaced along a circumferential direction of the cutout portion centered on an optical axis, wherein the cutout portion is formed in the spacer at a location corresponding to the third inner side surface or the fourth inner side surface.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the claimed invention was made to adjust the shape of the spacer such that the such that a width of a cutout portion at a first exterior surface was different from a width of the cutout portion at a second exterior surface, since it has been held that a mere change in shape of an element is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art when the change in shape is not significant to the function of the combination, In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966). One would have been motivated to implement a cutout portion having different widths, for the purpose of simplifying the manufacturing process.
Modified Sik fails to disclose wherein the first and second exterior side surfaces are curved, and each of the third inner side surface and the fourth inner side surface includes a concavely curved region having continuous curvature, except for the cutout portion.
However, Yang teaches a similar lens assembly comprising a spacer (Fig. 13, spacer S5), and discloses wherein first and second exterior side surface are curved (Fig. 13, top and bottom exterior surfaces of S5), and each of third and fourth inner side surfaces (Fig. 13, left and right interior surfaces of S5) include a concavely curved region having continuous curvature (Fig. 13, 6), except for the cutout portion (cutout portion of Sik’s Fig. 28 as modified by In re Dailey).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine modified Sik and Yang such that the first and second exterior side surfaces were curved, motivated by reducing the amount of material required to form the spacer.
PNG
media_image1.png
410
600
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Image 1. An edited version of Sik’s Figure 28, depicting the third inner side surface (interior surface to the left of the left dotted line) and fourth inner side surface (interior surface to the right of the right dotted line) of the spacer.
Regarding claim 9, modified Sik discloses wherein the cutout portion connects the first exterior surface and the second exterior surface of the spacer to the inner side surface (Sik - Fig. 28).
Regarding claim 14, modified Sik fails to disclose wherein the cutout portion has a width of 0.05 mm to 0.5 mm.
However, due to the nature of optical engineering, the process of lens assembly design includes manipulation of variables such as effective aperture diameter, aperture shape, lens surface radii, lens distances, and other shape concerns, in order to allow a lens system to meet its particular utility. This manipulation would normally be considered routine experimentation since the results are governed by known physics equations and are known to be result-effective (unless the particular range of values meets secondary considerations).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to adjust the width of the cutout portion of Sik such that it was 0.05 mm to 0.5 mm, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art, In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233 (C.C.P.A. 1955). In this case, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the invention to change the width of the cutout portion such that a width of 0.05 mm to 0.5 mm was satisfied, motivated by allowing the cutout portion to accommodate a screw of similar width.
6. Claims 15-16 are rejected under 35 USC 103 as being unpatentable over Sik in view of Yang, and further in view of Newport (“Lens Washer, 1.0 in. Diameter, 0.5 mm Thick, Delrin, 10-pack”, 07/12/2018, Newport—of record).
Regarding claims 15 and 16, modified Sik fails to disclose wherein the spacer has a thickness of 0.01 mm to 0.5 mm.
However, Newport teaches a spacer, and discloses wherein it has a thickness of 0.5 mm (Technical Specs, Thickness = 0.5 mm).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine modified Sik and Newport such that the spacer had a thickness of 0.5 mm, motivated by reducing the size of the device.
Conclusion
7. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Daniel Jeffery Jordan whose telephone number is 571-270-7641. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30a-6:00p.
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 Allen can be reached at 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.
/D. J. J./Examiner, Art Unit 2872
/TRAVIS S FISSEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872
