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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 8/13/2025 has been entered.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2, 5, 9 and 21 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.
Claims 10-13 and 16 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The closest prior art, Zhao et al. (PGPUB 20220035126) in view of Matsusaka et al. (PGPUB 20130016278), fails to disclose in combination with all of the other elements of the claim, wherein 0.32 < f3/f < 0.82. Modification of Zhao and Matsusaka to include the reduce power of the third lens would break the optical systems.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1, 3-4, 6-8 and 17-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhao et al. (PGPUB 20220035126) in view of Matsusaka et al. (PGPUB 20130016278).
Regarding claim 1, Zhao discloses an optical imaging system comprising:
a first lens group ([0007]);
a second lens group including two or more lenses, wherein the first lens group and the second lens group are sequentially arranged from an object side ([0007]),
wherein the first and second lens groups comprise a first lens, a second lens, a third lens, a fourth lens, a fifth lens, and a sixth lens, sequentially arranged from the object side (E1-6),
wherein the fourth lens has a concave object-side surface (at least Tables 1 and 3 where the fourth lens is aspheric with an inflection point on the object-side),
wherein the fifth lens has positive refractive power (Table 1),
wherein 0.8 < TTL/f < 1.2 (Table 2) in which TTL is a distance from an object-side surface of the foremost lens of the first lens group to an imaging plane, and f is a focal length of the optical imaging system.
While Zhao discloses lens movement for focusing ([0033]), they do not explicitly disclose wherein the second lens group is configured to be movable in an optical axis direction, and
a first lens group including two or more lenses.
However, Matsusaka teaches a six-lens optical system having a first and second group having at least a first and second lens in each (Ex. 6 Gr1 and Gr2), six lenses (L1-L6), a fifth positive lens ([0313]); and wherein the second group translates while focusing ([0151]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the invention to combine Zhao and Matsusaka such that the first group comprised at least two lenses and the second group moved for focusing motivated by reducing spherical aberration ([0151]).
Regarding claim 3, modified Zhao discloses wherein the first lens group includes a first lens, a second lens, and a third lens, sequentially arranged from the object side (Gr1 of Matusaka).
Regarding claim 4, modified Zhao discloses wherein the first lens has positive refractive power, wherein the second lens has negative refractive power, and wherein the third lens has positive refractive power (Table 1 of Zhao).
Regarding claim 6, modified Zhao discloses wherein an image-side surface of the third lens is convex (Table 1 of Zhao).
Regarding claim 7, modified Zhao discloses wherein the second lens group includes a fourth lens, a fifth lens, and a sixth lens, sequentially arranged from the object side ([0007] of Zhao).
Regarding claim 8, modified Zhao discloses wherein the fourth lens has negative refractive power and the sixth lens has negative refractive power (Table 1 of Zhao).
Regarding claim 17, Zhao discloses an optical imaging system comprising:
a first lens, a second lens, a third lens, a fourth lens, a fifth lens, and a sixth lens that are sequentially arranged from an object side (Table 1) and divided into a first lens group and a second lens group ([0007]),
wherein the fourth lens has a concave object-side surface (Tables 1 and 3),
wherein the fifth lens has positive refractive power (Table 1),
wherein the optical imaging system includes no more than six lenses (Table 1).
While Zhao discloses lens movement for focusing ([0033]), they do not explicitly disclose wherein the second lens group is configured to be movable in an optical axis direction, and
a first lens group including two or more lenses.
However, Matsusaka teaches a six-lens optical system having a first and second group having at least a first and second lens group (Ex. 6 Gr1 and Gr2), six lenses (L1-L6), a fifth positive lens ([0313]); and wherein the second group translates while focusing ([0151]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the invention to combine Zhao and Matsusaka such that the first group comprised at least two lenses and the second group moved for focusing motivated by reducing spherical aberration ([0151]).
Regarding claim 18, modified Zhao discloses wherein the first lens group comprises the first through the third lenses (Ex 6 of Matsusaka).
Modified Zhao does not disclose wherein the second lens group comprises the fourth through the sixth lenses.
While modified Zhao teaches that the sixth lens is in a third lens group, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the sixth lens into the second lens group as a matter of design choice since there is no requirement that the entirety of the second lens group move (In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975)).
Regarding claim 19, modified Zhao discloses wherein 0.8 < TTL/f < 1.2 (Table 2) in which TTL is a distance from an object-side surface of the first lens to an imaging plane, and f is a focal length of the optical imaging system.
Regarding claim 20, modified Zhao does not disclose wherein the first lens group comprises the first through the fourth lenses, and the second lens group comprises the fifth and sixth lenses.
While modified Zhao teaches that the sixth lens is in a third lens group, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to adjust the lens groups such that the first comprised the first through fourth lenses and the second comprised the fifth through sixth lenses as a matter of design choice since there is no requirement that the entirety of the second lens group move (In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975)).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-20 have been considered but are moot because of new grounds for rejection.
Examiner’s Notes
Regarding claim s 18 and 20, applicant has not specifically claimed that the entirety of the second group should move along the optical axis. Therefore, so long as a single lens within the group is movable the office would consider the limitation satisfied. Also, since no such specific requirement is made, it is arbitrary how one “groups” the lenses so long as the limitations of the independent claims are satisfied.
However, the following are prior art relevant to six-lens systems having two groups:
PGPUB 20040051964 – G1: 4 lenses, G2: 2 lenses
PGPUB 20050248854 – G1: 2 lenses, G2: 4 lenses
PGPUB 20060203355 – G1: 3 lenses, G2: 3 lenses
The obvious would consider it obvious to combine any one of the above prior arts with Zhao and/or Matsusaka in order to designate the lens groups as claimed in the event the applicant amended the claim language to require the entire second lens group to move.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TRAVIS S FISSEL whose telephone number is (313)446-6573. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-5PM.
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.
/TRAVIS S FISSEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872