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 .
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.
Response to Amendment
Applicant's arguments with respect to claims 1, 4-8, 10-17 as they pertain to the prior art have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection, as necessitated by amendment.
Claim Objections
Claim 8 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 8 states “wherein the first lens includes a first lens surface facing toward the display or the object and a second lens surface facing toward the image sensor” in lines 3-4 of the claim. This should be amended to say “wherein the first lens includes the first lens surface facing toward the display or the object and the second lens surface facing toward the image sensor” as these are already introduced in claim 1.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1, 4-7, 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et. al US 20210151425 (hereinafter “US 425” of record) in view of Kim et. al US 20210149157 (hereinafter “Kim” of record).
Regarding claim 1, US 425 teaches an electronic device comprising:
a display (US 425 fig. 5a - 400) including a panel layer in which a plurality of pixels are disposed (US 425 fig. 5a – 431, see also para. 0059); and
a camera module (US 425 fig. 5a - 500) disposed under the display (400), wherein the display (400) includes a first area overlapping a field of view of the camera module (US 425 fig. 5b – A1) and a second area around the first area (US 425 fig. 5b – A2), and
wherein an arrangement density of the plurality of first pixels in the first area (US 425 fig. 6 – A1) is lower than an arrangement density of the plurality of second pixels in the second area (US 425 fig. 6 – A2, see also para. 0059 – the transmission area may be formed to have pixels and/or wirings arranged at a lower density than the surrounding active area, where the transmission area resides within the display panel; see the annotated US 425 fig. 6 below)
PNG
media_image1.png
550
813
media_image1.png
Greyscale
wherein the camera module (500) includes an image sensor (US 425 fig. 5a - 540) and a plurality of lenses (US 425 fig. 5a - 530), and an optical axis of the plurality of lenses passes through the first area of the panel layer (US 425 fig. 5b),
wherein each of the plurality of lenses (530) includes lens surfaces disposed to face toward the display (400) and the image sensor (540, US 425 fig. 5a), respectively,
wherein the first lens (US 425 fig. 5a-b - 531) includes a first lens surface that is convex in a direction facing the display (US 524 fig. 5a-b – 531 is convex on the side facing 400),
wherein the first lens (531) includes a second lens surface that is flat and has no coating layer formed (US 425 fig. 5a-b – 531 has a flat second lens surface with no coating layer),
wherein the second lens (US 425 fig. 5a - 534) includes a third lens surface and a fourth lens surface (US 425 fig. 5a – one surface faces 400 and the other faces 540).
US 425 does not teach a coating layer.
In the same field of endeavor, Kim teaches wherein a coating layer (Kim fig. 5 - 4311) to reduce a flare having a pixel pattern shape by lowering reflectance (Kim para. 0083, see also MPEP §2112.01 – since the claimed antireflective coating structure is taught, it should perform the same function of flare reduction), is formed only on a lens surface (Kim fig. 5 - 4301 and 4302 of 431) of the plurality of lenses (Kim fig. 4 - 430 including 431-434) satisfying at least one of a first coating condition or a second coating condition regarding whether an angle of slope of a partial area of the lens surface is within a specified range (Kim fig. 5 - either side of 431 is sloped in area A1, therefore could satisfy a first coating condition or a second coating condition),
wherein the angle of slope is an angle formed by the lens surface (4301) with a normal line perpendicular to the optical axis (see annotated Kim fig. 5 below - the angle of slope and normal line are shown),
PNG
media_image2.png
528
581
media_image2.png
Greyscale
a first lens surface (Kim fig. 4 – 431 with 4301) that is convex in a direction facing the display (Kim fig. 4 – 431 has convex side facing display 330, 331) and has a coating layer formed on a portion centered on the optical axis (Kim fig. 5 – 4311, see also para. 0083),
wherein the third surface and the fourth surface have different areas where the coating layer is formed (Kim para. 0128-0129),
wherein a first reference area (Kim fig. 5 – A1) is defined by an area overlapping a minimum effective diameter of lens surfaces of the plurality of lenses in a direction of the optical axis (see above Kim fig. 4, in which A1 is defined as being between the two black lines) and a second reference area is defined by an area having a same center as the first reference area and having a diameter 0.5 times a diameter of the first reference area (see annotated Kim fig. 4 below – where A1 is between the two black lines and the second reference area is between the two grey lines),
PNG
media_image3.png
562
810
media_image3.png
Greyscale
wherein a first coating condition is defined by the following conditional expressions:
−10°≤AS1≤10° (based on annotated Kim fig. 5 below, AS1 ≈ 3◦); and
−5°≤AS2≤5° (based on annotated Kim fig. 5 below, AS2 ≈ 2◦),
wherein “AS1” represents the angle of slope of a partial area of the lens surface located in the first reference area, and “AS2” represents the angle of slope of a partial area of the lens surface located in the second reference area,
PNG
media_image4.png
691
978
media_image4.png
Greyscale
wherein the second coating condition is defined by the following conditional expressions:
ED≥1.5×RaD (based on Kim fig. 12a, D = ED ≈ 2.3, and RaD ≈ 1.5, so 2.3≥2.25, see also citations below for each value); and
15°≤AS3≤40° (see annotated Kim fig. 4 below, zoomed in to show the angle AS3, AS3 ≈ 18◦),
wherein “ED” represents an effective diameter of the lens surface (Kim fig. 12a – D = ED ≈ 2.3 for lens 210, see also fig. 8a for lens 431 having the same anti-reflection coating 211 as 4311 disposed on 431 and para. 0128 – lens 210 may be at least partly similar to one of the lenses of 430), “RaD” represents the diameter of the first reference area (approximated using Kim fig. 12a compared to ED, approximately 1.5), and “AS3” represents the angle of slope of a partial area of the lens surface located between an area whose diameter is 0.7 times the effective diameter and an area whose diameter is 0.85 times the effective diameter (see Kim fig. 4 below, zoomed in to show the point in question between two denoted lines, where the angle can be seen) for the purpose of maintaining permeation performance without degrading the permeability of the lens in the first area of the lens (Kim para. 0083). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a coating meeting the specific conditions as taught by Kim in the electronic device of US 425 in order to maintain permeation performance without degrading the permeability of the lens in the first area of the lens (Kim para. 0083).
PNG
media_image5.png
279
324
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 4, US 425 and Kim teach the electronic device of claim 1, and Kim further teaches wherein the angle of slope is defined as an angle defined to face the optical axis and formed by a tangent line defined to pass through a first point of the lens surface and a normal line defined to extend perpendicular to the optical axis while passing through the first point (see annotated Kim fig. 5 below, the first point – labeled as one point below but is the same point, tangent line passing through it, the normal line perpendicular to the optical axis, and the optical axis are all labeled in relation to each other and circled – and the slope between the tangent line and the normal line faces the optical axis).
PNG
media_image6.png
646
809
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 5, US 425 and Kim teach the electronic device of claim 4, and Kim further teaches wherein the tangent line defined to pass through the first point of the lens surface passes through a first intersection on the optical axis, and the normal line perpendicular to the optical axis passes through a second intersection on the optical axis (see annotated Kim fig. 5 below, where the first point and first and second intersections made when the tangent line and the normal line respectively cross the optical axis are labeled), and
PNG
media_image7.png
646
865
media_image7.png
Greyscale
wherein the angle of slope corresponding to the first point is an included angle between a first line segment defined to connect the first point and the first intersection and a second line segment defined to connect the first point and the second intersection in a triangle having the first point, the first intersection, and the second intersection as vertexes thereof (see annotated Kim fig. 5 below, where the triangle made of vertices including the first point, the first intersection, and the second intersection is circled and each vertex labeled).
PNG
media_image8.png
646
984
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 6, US 425 and Kim teach the electronic device of claim 4, and Kim further teaches wherein the angle of slope formed in a direction toward the image sensor with respect to the normal line has a positive (+) sign (see annotated Kim fig. 5 below, point 2 has a positive angle of slope formed in a direction toward the image sensor with respect to the normal line), and
wherein the angle of slope formed in a direction toward the display or an object with respect to the normal line has a negative (−) sign (see annotated Kim fig. 5 below, point 1 has a negative angle of slope formed in a direction toward the display or object with respect to the normal line).
PNG
media_image9.png
646
691
media_image9.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 7, US 425 and Kim teach the electronic device of claim 1, and US 425 further teaches wherein the plurality of lenses (530) include at least three lenses (531-534) sequentially disposed one on another along the optical axis in a direction from the display (400) to the image sensor (540, US 425 fig. 5a).
Regarding claim 10, US 425 and Kim teach the electronic device of claim 1, and US 425 further teach wherein the first area (US 425 figs. 5a-b – the area labeled as 5b in fig. 5a and shown in fig. 5b), when the display (400) is viewed from above, includes a plurality of pixel areas corresponding to the plurality of pixels (US 425 fig. 6 – P disposed within A1 and A2, see also fig. 7A and para. 0059) and a plurality of opening areas (US 425 fig. 7A – 461, see also para. 0060) between the plurality of pixel areas (US 425 fig. 7A – 461 is disposed between P), and
wherein a first transmittance of the plurality of pixel areas (P) and a second transmittance of the plurality of opening areas (461) differ from each other (US 425 para. 0069 and 0076 – the transmittance of A1 depends on the placement/adjustment of 461).
Regarding claim 11, US 425 and Kim teach the electronic device of claim 10, and US 425 further teaches wherein a difference between the first transmittance and the second transmittance is 15% or more for light having a wavelength of 550 nm (US 425 para. 0076 – display panel includes 460 which is opaque and transmits 0% of visible light including at 550 nm, and A1 which is transparent and transmits 100% of visible light including at 55nm, which would result in a difference of at least 15% or above).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 425 and Kim as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of Ning US 20050162757 (hereinafter “Ning” of record).
Regarding claim 8, US 425 and Kim teach the electronic device of claim 1, and Kim further teaches wherein the plurality of lenses (Kim fig. 4 - 430) include a first lens (Kim fig. 4 - 431) located closest to the display (Kim fig. 4 - 330, 331) or an object,
wherein the first lens (431) includes a first lens surface facing toward the display or the object and a second lens surface facing toward the image sensor (Kim fig. 4 – 431 has a side facing 330, 331 and a side facing 440), and
the coating layer (4311) is disposed on an entire area or a partial area of the first lens surface (Kim figs. 4-5 – 4311 is disposed on a surface of at least 431, see also para. 0128-0129 and figs. 12a-g – the coating may be disposed on at least part of one or all the lenses in a lens assembly).
US 425 and Kim do not teach the distance between the center of the first lens surface and the image sensor (TTL) and the length of a diagonal line of the image sensor (ImgD).
In a similar field of endeavor, Ning teaches wherein the coating layer is disposed on an entire area or a partial area of the first lens surface with respect to a first lens surface satisfying a third coating condition defined by the following conditional expression:
TTL/ImgD≤0.65 (Ning para. 0043 - TT/DI<1.5),
wherein “TTL” represents a distance between a center of the first lens surface and the image sensor, which is measured in a direction of the optical axis, and “ImgD” represents a length of a diagonal line of the image sensor for the purpose of allowing the camera to be a low profile optical imager making it suitable for compact digital camera modules (Ning para. 0043). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the claimed range of TTL/ImgD≤0.65 as taught by Ning in the electronic device of US 425 and Kim in order to allow the camera to be used in compact digital camera modules (Ning para. 0043).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 425 and Kim as applied to claim 1 above, in view of Seto et. al US 20040043210 (hereinafter “Seto” of record).
Regarding claim 12, US 425 and Kim teach the electronic device of claim 1, and Kim further teaches the coating layer (4311).
US 425 and Kim do not teach wherein the coating layer includes a porous layer in which a plurality of pores are defined.
In a similar field of endeavor, Seto teaches wherein the coating layer includes a porous layer in which a plurality of pores are defined (Seto para. 0014) for the purpose of lowering the apparent refractive index of the antireflection film. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a porous coating as taught by Seto in the electronic device of US 425 and Kim in order to lower the refractive index of it (Seto para. 0014).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 425 and Kim as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Tanaka et. al US 20080055728 (hereinafter “Tanaka” of record).
Regarding claim 13, US 425 and Kim teach the electronic device of claim 1, and Kim further teaches the coating layer (4311).
US 425 and Kim do not teach wherein the coating layer includes a bumpy structure in which a plurality of protrusions are defined.
In a similar field of endeavor, Tanaka teaches wherein the coating layer includes a bumpy structure in which a plurality of protrusions are defined (Tanaka para. 0039) for the purpose of eliminating unwanted reflectance and allowing a high level of sensitivity for a sensor (Tanaka para. 0010). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a coating with a bumpy structure as taught by Tanaka in the electronic device of US 425 and Kim in order to provide a high level of sensitivity for a sensor (Tanaka para. 0010).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 425 and Kim as applied to claim 1 above, in view of Takahashi et. al US 20150103226 (hereinafter “Takahashi” of record).
Regarding claim 14, US 425 and Kim teach the electronic device of claim 1, and Kim further teaches
a coating layer (4311).
US 425 and Kim do not teach wherein a refractive index of the coating layer formed on the lens surface gradually increases as being closer to the lens surface.
In the same field of endeavor, Takahashi teaches wherein a refractive index of the coating layer (Takahashi fig. 2 - 16) formed on the lens surface (Takahashi fig. 2) gradually increases as being closer to the lens surface (Takahashi para. 0050-0051 – the refractive index of the light blocking portion gradually increases from the surface of the air layer toward the adhesion surface of the lens) for the purpose of enhancing an antireflection effect (Takahashi para. 0050). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a coating layer gradually changing from air to lens surface as taught by Takahashi in the electronic device of US 425 and Kim in order to enhance an antireflection effect (Takahashi para. 0050).
Claims 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 425 and Kim as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of Ito et. al US 20030011315 (hereinafter “Ito” of record).
Regarding claim 15, US 425 and Kim teach the electronic device of claim 1, and Kim further teaches a coating layer (4311).
US 425 and Kim do not specifically teach wherein an average reflectance on the lens surface with the coating layer formed thereon is 0.25% or less for light having a wavelength range of 480 nm to 630 nm.
In the same field of endeavor, Ito teaches wherein an average reflectance on the lens surface with the coating layer formed thereon is 0.25% or less for light having a wavelength range of 480 nm to 630 nm (Ito para. 0112 – the measured reflectance of the coating is in a range of 0.1 to 1% for light having a wavelength range of 380 to 640 nm, which includes all reflectance value being 0.1%, which is lesser than 0.25%) for the purpose of enhancing the clearness of images on a display (Ito para. 0113). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have an average reflectance of 0.25% or less as taught by Ito in the electronic device of US 425 and Kim in order to enhance the clarity of images (Ito para. 0113).
Regarding claim 16, US 425 and Kim teach the electronic device of claim 1, and Kim further teaches a coating layer (4311).
US 425 and Kim do not specifically teach wherein a maximum reflectance on the lens surface with the coating layer formed thereon is 0.35% or less for light having a wavelength range of 480 nm to 630 nm.
In the same field of endeavor, Ito teaches wherein a maximum reflectance on the lens surface with the coating layer formed thereon is 0.35% or less for light having a wavelength range of 480 nm to 630 nm (Ito para. 0112 - the measured reflectance of the coating is in a range of 0.1 to 1% for light having a wavelength range of 380 to 640 nm, which includes all reflectance value being 0.1%, which is lesser than 0.25%) for the purpose of enhancing the clearness of images on a display (Ito para. 0113). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a maximum reflectance of 0.25% or less as taught by Ito in the electronic device of US 425 and Kim in order to enhance the clarity of images (Ito para. 0113).
Regarding claim 17, US 425 and Kim teach the electronic device of claim 1, and Kim further teaches a coating layer (4311).
US 425 and Kim do not specifically teach wherein a reflectance deviation on the lens surface with the coating layer formed thereon is 0.25% or less for light having a wavelength range of 450 nm to 630 nm.
In the same field of endeavor, Ito teaches wherein a reflectance deviation on the lens surface with the coating layer formed thereon is 0.25% or less for light having a wavelength range of 450 nm to 630 nm (Ito para. 0112 - the measured reflectance of the coating is in a range of 0.1 to 1% for light having a wavelength range of 380 to 640 nm, which includes all reflectance value being 0.1%, which would give a deviation value of 0%, which is lesser than 0.25%) for the purpose of enhancing the clearness of images on a display (Ito para. 0113). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a reflectance deviation of 0.25% or less as taught by Ito in the electronic device of US 425 and Kim in order to enhance the clarity of images (Ito para. 0113).
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 ELIZABETH M HALL whose telephone number is (703)756-5795. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9-5:30 pm PST.
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, Ricky Mack can be reached at (571)272-2333. 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.
/ELIZABETH M HALL/Examiner, Art Unit 2872
/RICKY L MACK/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Prosecution Insights