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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 11/14/2025 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The present office action is made in response to the amendment filed by applicant on 11/14/2025. 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, 7-10, 12 and 16 and added a new claim, i.e., claim 23, into the application.
Response to Arguments
The amendments to the claims as provided in the amendment of 11/14/2025, and applicant’s arguments provided in the mentioned amendment, pages 10-14, have been fully considered and resulted the following conclusions:
Regarding the claims, the following conclusions are made:
A1) because applicant has added a new claim, i.e., claim 23, into the application and has not canceled any claim from the application, thus the pending claims are claims 1, 3-4, 6-16 and 18-23 (Note that claims 2 and 17 were canceled in the amendment of 09/09/2024 and claim 5 was canceled in the amendment of 05/16/2025);
A2) a review of the new claim 23 has resulted that the claim repeats a feature which was previously recited in the independent claim 1 thus the newly-added claim 23 is grouped into the elected Invention II. As a result, claims 1, 4, 6-10, 16, 18 and 23 are examined in the present office action, and claims 3, 11-15 and 19-22 have been withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to nonelected Inventions I and III-IV.
Applicant should note that the non-elected claims 3, 11-15 and 21 will be rejoined if the linking claim 1 is later found as an allowable claim, and the non-elected claims 19-20 and 22 will be rejoined if the linking claim 16 is later found as an allowable claim.
B) Regarding the rejection of claims 1, 4, 6-10, 16 and 18 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sano et al (US Patent No. 9,310,582) as set forth in the office action of 09/04/2025, the amendments to the claims as provide in the amendment of 11/14/2025, and applicant’s arguments provided in the mentioned amendment, pages 10-14, 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 § 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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1, 6-7, 9-10 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yunbai (US Patent No. 11,131,835).
Yunbai discloses an imaging lens for use in an imaging device.
a) Regarding to claims 1 and 16, the imaging lens for use in an imaging device which comprises an image sensor disposed in an imaging plane of the imaging lens, see column 1. It is noted that the imaging lens as understood comprises a lens barrel for supporting at least one lens. The imaging lens of the Example 1 as described in columns 8-9 and 12-14 and shown in fig. 1 comprises the following features:
a1) a stop (ST), five lenses (L1-L5), and an IR-cut filter (IR) arranged in that order from an object side to an image side of the apparatus;
a2) the five lenses (L1-L5) comprises a first positive lens (L1), a second negative lens (L2), a third positive lens (L3), a fourth positive lens (L4), and a fifth negative lens (L5);
a3) the object-side surface (2) of the first lens (L1) is a convex surface facing to the object side and the image-side surface (3) of the first lens (L1) is a concave surface facing to the image side wherein both surfaces are aspheric surfaces; the object-side surface (4) of the second lens (L2) is a convex surface facing to the object side and the image-side surface (5) of the second lens (L2) is a concave surface facing to the image side wherein both surfaces are aspheric surfaces; the image-side surface (7) of the third lens (L3) is a convex surface facing to the image side wherein the surface is an aspheric surface; the object-side surface (8) of the fourth lens (L4) is a concave surface facing to the object side and the image-side surface (9) of the fourth lens (L4) is a convex surface facing to the image side wherein both surfaces are aspheric surfaces; and the object-side surface (10) of the fifth lens (L5) is a concave surface facing to the object side and the image-side surface (11) of the fifth lens (L5) is a concave surface facing to the image side wherein both surfaces are aspheric surfaces, see Table 1 as provided in column 12;
a4) regarding to the condition governing the relationships among the half of maximum angle view, HFOV, the focal length, f, of the image lens, the radius of curvature, R2, of the image-side surface of the first lens, the radius of curvature, R3, of the object-side surface of the second lens, the radius of curvature, R9, of the object-side surface of the fifth lens, the focal length, f1, of the first lens and the focal length, f5, of the fifth lens, it is noted that from the optical data of the imaging lens as provided in Table 1, then the half of maximum angle view, HFOV, of the imaging lens is 39.20, the focal length, f, of the imaging lens is 3.91 mm, R2 is 5.3613 mm, R3 is 23.3816 mm, R9 is -4,6976 mm, f1 is 3.193 mm, and f5 is -2.052 mm, the following results are obtained:
a41) the value of the ratio of (HFOV*(R9/f)) is -47.100 which value is inside the range of (-79.810; -38.470);
a42) the value of the ratio of R2/R3 is 0.23 which value is closed to the lower value of 0.25 of the range of (0.25; 0.58); and
a43) the value of the ratio of f1/f5 is -1.56 which value is inside the range of (-2.11; -1.35) as claimed.
Applicant should note that it was decided in the Courts that “the disclosure in the prior art of any value within a claimed range is an anticipation of that range.”, In re Wertheim, 541 F. 2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); Titanium Metals Corporation of America, 227 USPQ 773 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Petering, 301 F. 2d 676, 133 USPQ 275 CCPA 1962).
The only feature missing from the imaging lens for use in an imaging device as provided in Example 1 is as follow: While the imaging lens of the Example 1 discloses that the value of R2/R3 is 0.23, it does not disclose that that value is inside the range of (0.25; 0.58) as claimed in each of claims 1 and 16.
However, the range of 0.23 for the ratio of R2/R3 is so close to the value of 0.25 in the claimed range that the imaging lens of the Example 1 with value of 0.23 for the ratio of R2/R3 as provided by Yunbai is working fine with the range of (0.25; 0.58) as claimed in each of present claims 1 and 16. In other words, there is not any unexpected result and/or there is not any difference in optical performance occurred for the imaging lens of Example 1 provided by Yunbai and the imaging lens as recited in each of present claims 1 and 16. Alternatively, it would have obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to utilize the imaging lens of the Example 1 as provided by Yunbai and adjust the optical characteristics of the lens element(s) constituted the lens groups of the imaging lens so that the value of the ratio of R2/R3 is inside the ranged claimed or any similar range(s) to meet a particular application. Applicant should further note that it has been held in the Courts that a discovery an optimum value or workable range involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233; In re Boesch, 617 F. 2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
b) Regarding to present claim 6, from Table 1, it is noted that the radius of curvature, R2, of the image-side surface of the first lens (L1) is 5.3613 mm, and the radius of curvature, R8, of the image-side surface of the fourth lens (L4) is -1.2303 then the value of the ratio of R2/R8 is -4.36 which is inside the range of (-6.11; -3.46) as claimed.
c) Regarding to present claim 7, from Table 1, it is noted that the radius of curvature, R2, of the image-side surface of the first lens (L1) is 5.3613 mm, and the radius of curvature, R10, of the image-side surface of the fifth lens (L5) is 1.4822 mm then the value of the ratio of R2/10 is 3.62 which is inside the range of (3.09; 5.81) as claimed.
d) Regarding to present claim 9, from Table 1, it is noted that the radius of curvature, R3, of the object-side surface of the second lens (L2) is 23.3816 mm, the radius of curvature, R8, of the image-side surface of the fourth lens (L4) is -1.2303, and the distance, T34, from the image-side surface, R6, of the third lens (L3) to the object-side surface, R7, of the fourth lens (L4) is 0.5661 then the value of the ratio of (R3/R8)/T34 is -33.57 mm-1 which is inside the range of (-41.59 mm-1; -11.45 mm-1) as claimed.
e) Regarding to present claim 10, from Table 1, it is noted that the radius of curvature, R9, of the object-side surface of the fifth lens (L5) is -4.6976 and the focal length, f5, of the fifth lens (L5) is -2.052 then the value of the ratio of R9/f5 is 2.90 which is inside the range of (1.74; 3.58) as claimed.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4, 8, 18 and 23 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
a) The lens assembly as recited in the dependent claim 4 is allowable with respect to the prior art, in particular, the US Patent No. 11,131,835 by the condition governing the range of the ratio of R3/R1 as recited in the feature thereof “the radius of curvature … 5.37 < R3/R1 < 14.28” (claim 4 on lines 2-4). It is noted that while an imaging lens having a stop, five lenses with powers and arrangement of the lenses, and the conditions governing the ratios of (HFOV x (R9/f)), R2/R3 and f1/f5 as recited in the independent claim 1 are disclosed in the mentioned Patent; however, the Patent does not disclose the value of the ratio of R3/R1 is inside the range claimed in claim 4.
b) The lens assembly as recited in the dependent claim 8 is allowable with respect to the prior art, in particular, the US Patent No. 11,131,835 by the condition governing the range of the ratio of R3/R4 as recited in the feature thereof “a radius of curvature … 2.32 < R3/R4 < 4.46” (claim 8 on lines 2-4). It is noted that while an imaging lens having a stop, five lenses with powers and arrangement of the lenses, and the conditions governing the ratios of (HFOV x (R9/f)), R2/R3 and f1/f5 as recited in the independent claim 1 are disclosed in the mentioned Patent; however, the Patent does not disclose the value of the ratio of R3/R4 is inside the range claimed in claim 8.
c) The photographing module having a lens assembly as recited in the dependent claim 18 is allowable with respect to the prior art, in particular, the US Patent No. 11,131,835 by the condition governing the range of the ratio of R3/R1 as recited in the feature thereof “the radius of curvature … 5.37 < R3/R1 < 14.28” (claim 18 on lines 2-4). It is noted that while an image device having an imaging lens having a stop, five lenses with powers and arrangement of the lenses, and the conditions governing the ratios of (HFOV x (R9/f)), R2/R3 and f1/f5 as recited in the independent claim 16 are disclosed in the mentioned Patent; however, the Patent does not disclose the value of the ratio of R3/R1 is inside the range claimed in claim 18.
d) The lens assembly as recited in the dependent claim 23 is allowable with respect to the prior art, in particular, the US Patent No. 11,131,835 by the condition governing the range of the ratio of (R3/R10)/T5F as recited in the feature thereof “the radius of curvature … 19.76 mm-1 < (R3/R10)/T5F < 46.84 mm-1” (claim 23 on lines 1-5). It is noted that while an image device having an imaging lens having a stop, five lenses with powers and arrangement of the lenses, and the conditions governing the ratios of (HFOV x (R9/f)), R2/R3 and f1/f5 as recited in the independent claim 16 are disclosed in the mentioned Patent; however, the Patent does not disclose the value of the ratio of (R3/R10)/T5F is inside the range claimed in claim 23.
Conclusion
The US Patent No. 10,877,246 is cited as of interest in that it discloses an imaging lens having a stop and five lenses with powers and arrangement are similar to that recited in present claims 1 and 16; however, the imaging lens of the mentioned Patent does not satisfy all conditions governing the ranges as claimed in each of present claims 1 and 16.
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 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.
/THONG Q NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872