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 .
Response to Amendment
The Amendments filed 6/19/25 and 9/3/25 are not entered. The Amendment filed 11/4/25 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the amended claims filed 6/19/25 have been considered as follows.
35 USC 102/103 Rejections of the claims:
Applicant’s arguments are moot in view of the new ground rejections.
To the extent it may apply, Applicant appears to argue scaling of an optical lens assembly is not obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art. Examiner respectfully disagrees and points out, the optical lens assemblies in the prior arts cited in the office action dated 4/4/25 are in the domain of geometric optics. And it is well-known in the art the image and the aberrations will scale proportionally according to the scaling factor of the optical lens assembly. Further it is well-known scaling up an optical lens assembly will have better diffraction effects but take more space, and scaling down the optical lens assembly will have worse diffraction effects but take less space. One of ordinary skill in the art will have motivation to scaling down the assembly for the purposes of having smaller image size which has advantage of compact size.
For the obviousness to choose an IR band-pass filter as the filter, it does not involve any remarkable change in ray tracing process and will have little effects if any on the image quality.
Therefore Examiner maintains some rejections, which have been modified as necessary due to the amendments to the claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 of this title, 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.
Claim(s) 1,3-4,6,8-14,16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bone (US 20180372996, of record).
PNG
media_image1.png
586
790
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, Bone teaches (Figs. 16,28) An optical lens assembly, in order from an object side to an image side, comprising:
a first lens with negative refractive power, comprising an object-side surface and an image-side surface, the object-side surface of the first lens being convex in a paraxial region thereof, and the image-side surface of the first lens being concave in a paraxial region thereof;
a second lens with negative refractive power, comprising an object-side surface and an image-side surface, the object-side surface of the second lens being convex in a paraxial region thereof, and the image-side surface of the second lens being concave in a paraxial region thereof;
a third lens with positive refractive power, comprising an object-side surface and an image-side surface, the object-side surface of the third lens being convex in a paraxial region thereof, and the image-side surface of the third lens being convex in a paraxial region thereof;
a fourth lens with positive refractive power, comprising an object-side surface and an image-side surface, the object-side surface of the fourth lens being convex in a paraxial region thereof, and the image-side surface of the fourth lens being convex in a paraxial region thereof;
a fifth lens with negative refractive power, comprising an object-side surface and an image-side surface, the object-side surface of the fifth lens being concave in a paraxial region thereof, and the image-side surface of the fifth lens being concave in a paraxial region thereof;
a sixth lens with positive refractive power, comprising an object-side surface and an image-side surface, the object-side surface of the sixth lens being convex in a paraxial region thereof, and the image-side surface of the sixth lens being convex in a paraxial region thereof; and
an IR band-pass filter ([114], “visible and the near infrared (NIR) dual band”);
wherein a maximum field of view of the optical lens assembly is FOV, a radius of curvature of the object-side surface of the second lens is R3, a radius of curvature of the image-side surface of the third lens is R6, an angle between a chief ray incident on an image plane at a maximum view angle of the optical lens assembly, and a normal line of the image plane is CRA, a focal length of the optical lens assembly is f, a distance from the object-side surface of the first lens to the image plane along an optical axis is TL, a distance from the image-side surface of the sixth lens to the image plane along the optical axis is BFL, and the following condition is satisfied: −36.91<FOV*R3/(CRA*R6)<−2.28 (~ -15).
Bone does not explicitly teach 1.88 mm2<(TL−BFL)*f<4.40 mm2 (8.9).
Absent any showing of criticality and/or unpredictability, having 1.88 mm2<(TL−BFL)*f<4.40 mm2 would have been known to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the purposes of having desired size or imaging effects by scaling down the assembly.
Accordingly, 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 teaching of Bone by having 1.88 mm2<(TL−BFL)*f<4.40 mm2 for the purposes of having desired size or imaging effects by scaling down the assembly.
Regarding claim 3, the modified Bone teaches all the limitations as stated in claim 1, but does not explicitly teach The optical lens assembly as claimed in claim 1, wherein a focal length of the third lens is f3, a central thickness of the third lens along an optical axis is CT3, and the following condition is satisfied: 0.61 mm2<f3*CT3<3.26 mm2 (4.7).
Absent any showing of criticality and/or unpredictability, having 0.61 mm2<f3*CT3<3.26 mm2 would have been known to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the purposes of having desired size or imaging effects by scaling down the assembly.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the teaching of Bone by having 0.61 mm2<f3*CT3<3.26 mm2 for the purposes of having desired size or imaging effects.
Regarding claim 4, Bone further teaches The optical lens assembly as claimed in claim 1, wherein a focal length of the optical lens assembly is f, a focal length of the fourth lens is f4, and the following condition is satisfied: 0.39<f/f4<0.69 (0.59).
Regarding claim 6, Bone further teaches The optical lens assembly as claimed in claim 1, wherein a distance from the object-side surface of the first lens to the image plane along an optical axis is TL, a maximum image height of the optical lens assembly is IMH, and the following condition is satisfied: 3.47<TL/IMH<6.40 (3.52).
Regarding claim 8, Bone further teaches The optical lens assembly as claimed in claim 1, wherein an Abbe number of the fourth lens is vd4, an Abbe number of the fifth lens is vd5, and the following condition is satisfied: 28.50<vd4−vd5<44.11 (42).
Regarding claim 9, the modified Bone teaches all the limitations as stated in claim 1, but does not explicitly teach The optical lens assembly as claimed in claim 1, wherein a focal length of the fifth lens is f5, a refractive index of the fifth lens is nd5, and the following condition is satisfied: −0.80 mm<f5/nd5<−0.49 mm. (-1.62).
Absent any showing of criticality and/or unpredictability, having −0.80 mm<f5/nd5<−0.49 mm would have been known to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the purposes of having desired size or imaging effects by scaling down the assembly.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the teaching of Bone by having −0.80 mm<f5/nd5<−0.49 mm for the purposes of having desired size or imaging effects by scaling down the assembly.
Regarding claim 10, Bone further teaches The optical lens assembly as claimed in claim 1, wherein a radius of curvature of the object-side surface of the first lens is R1, a radius of curvature of the image-side surface of the first lens is R2, and the following condition is satisfied: 2.73<R1/R2<5.11 (4).
Regarding claim 11, Bone further teaches The optical lens assembly as claimed in claim 1, wherein a radius of curvature of the object-side surface of the first lens is R1, a radius of curvature of the image-side surface of the first lens is R2, the radius of curvature of the object-side surface of the second lens is R3, and the following condition is satisfied: 0.47 mm<R1*R2/R3<2.11 mm (0.8).
Regarding claim 12, the modified Bone teaches all the limitations as stated in claim 1, but does not explicitly teach The optical lens assembly as claimed in claim 1, wherein a focal length of the second lens is f2, the radius of curvature of the object-side surface of the second lens is R3, and the following condition is satisfied: −16.57 mm2<R3*f2<−6.42 mm2 (-26.4).
Absent any showing of criticality and/or unpredictability, having −16.57 mm2<R3*f2<−6.42 mm2 would have been known to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the purposes of having desired size or imaging effects by scaling down the assembly.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the teaching of Bone by having −16.57 mm2<R3*f2<−6.42 mm2 for the purposes of having desired size or imaging effects by scaling down the assembly.
Regarding claim 13, Bone further teaches The optical lens assembly as claimed in claim 1, wherein the radius of curvature of the object-side surface of the second lens is R3, the radius of curvature of the image-side surface of the third lens is R6, and the following condition is satisfied: −7.21<R3/R6<−0.43 (-2.5).
Regarding claim 14, the modified Bone teaches all the limitations as stated in claim 1, but does not explicitly teach The optical lens assembly as claimed in claim 1, wherein a focal length of the second lens is f2, a focal length of the third lens is f3, and the following condition is satisfied: −8.13 mm2<f2*f3<−1.43 mm2 (-16.2).
Absent any showing of criticality and/or unpredictability, having −8.13 mm2<f2*f3<−1.43 mm2 would have been known to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the purposes of having desired size or imaging effects by scaling down the assembly.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the teaching of Bone by having −8.13 mm2<f2*f3<−1.43 mm2 for the purposes of having desired size or imaging effects by scaling down the assembly.
Regarding claim 16, Bone further teaches A photographing module, comprising:
a lens barrel;
the optical lens assembly of claim 1 disposed in the lens barrel; and
an image sensor disposed on an image plane of the optical lens assembly (by default, there are lens barrel and image sensor for the lens assembly).
Claim(s) 1-2,5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen (CN 114217416, as evidenced by the translation, all of record).
PNG
media_image2.png
388
412
media_image2.png
Greyscale
-
Regarding claim 1, Chen teaches (Fig. 9, Tables 3-4) An optical lens assembly, in order from an object side to an image side, comprising:
a first lens with negative refractive power, comprising an object-side surface and an image-side surface, the object-side surface of the first lens being convex in a paraxial region thereof, and the image-side surface of the first lens being concave in a paraxial region thereof;
a second lens with negative refractive power, comprising an object-side surface and an image-side surface, the object-side surface of the second lens being convex in a paraxial region thereof, and the image-side surface of the second lens being concave in a paraxial region thereof;
a third lens with positive refractive power, comprising an object-side surface and an image-side surface, the object-side surface of the third lens being convex in a paraxial region thereof, and the image-side surface of the third lens being convex in a paraxial region thereof;
a fourth lens with positive refractive power, comprising an object-side surface and an image-side surface, the object-side surface of the fourth lens being convex in a paraxial region thereof, and the image-side surface of the fourth lens being convex in a paraxial region thereof;
a fifth lens with negative refractive power, comprising an object-side surface and an image-side surface, the object-side surface of the fifth lens being concave in a paraxial region thereof, and the image-side surface of the fifth lens being concave in a paraxial region thereof;
a sixth lens with positive refractive power, comprising an object-side surface and an image-side surface, the object-side surface of the sixth lens being convex in a paraxial region thereof, and the image-side surface of the sixth lens being convex in a paraxial region thereof; and
a filter (G1);
wherein a maximum field of view of the optical lens assembly is FOV, a radius of curvature of the object-side surface of the second lens is R3, a radius of curvature of the image-side surface of the third lens is R6, an angle between a chief ray incident on an image plane at a maximum view angle of the optical lens assembly, and a normal line of the image plane is CRA, and the following condition is satisfied: −36.91<FOV*R3/(CRA*R6)<−2.28 (~ -210x5.2/(27.3x3.5).
Chen does not teach the filter is an IR band-pass filter and 1.88 mm2<(TL−BFL)*f<4.40 mm2 (9).
Absent any showing of criticality and/or unpredictability, having an IR band-pass filter would have been known to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the purposes of having an IR imaging device.
Accordingly, 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 teaching of Chen by having an IR band-pass filter for the purposes of having an IR imaging device.
Further absent any showing of criticality and/or unpredictability, having 1.88 mm2<(TL−BFL)*f<4.40 mm2 would have been known to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the purposes of having desired size or imaging effects by scaling down the assembly.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the teaching of Chen by having 1.88 mm2<(TL−BFL)*f<4.40 mm2 for the purposes of having desired size or imaging effects by scaling down the assembly.
Regarding claim 2, Chen further teaches The optical lens assembly as claimed in claim 1, wherein a focal length of the optical lens assembly is f, a focal length of the first lens is f1, and the following condition is satisfied: −0.33<f/f1<−0.18 (0.27).
Regarding claim 5, Chen further teaches The optical lens assembly as claimed in claim 1, wherein a focal length of the fourth lens is f4, a focal length of the fifth lens is f5, a central thickness of the fourth lens along an optical axis is CT4, a central thickness of the fifth lens along the optical axis is CT5, and the following condition is satisfied: −0.77<(f4/CT4)/(f5/CT5)<−0.44 (2.86/1.24/(-1.58/0.45)=-0.66).
Claim(s) 1,15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yue (CN 113985576, as evidenced by the translation, all of record).
PNG
media_image3.png
412
386
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, Yue teaches (Fig. 5, Table 5) An optical lens assembly, in order from an object side to an image side, comprising (L1-L6):
a first lens with negative refractive power, comprising an object-side surface and an image-side surface, the object-side surface of the first lens being convex in a paraxial region thereof, and the image-side surface of the first lens being concave in a paraxial region thereof;
a second lens with negative refractive power, comprising an object-side surface and an image-side surface, the object-side surface of the second lens being convex in a paraxial region thereof, and the image-side surface of the second lens being concave in a paraxial region thereof;
a third lens with positive refractive power, comprising an object-side surface and an image-side surface, the object-side surface of the third lens being convex in a paraxial region thereof, and the image-side surface of the third lens being convex in a paraxial region thereof;
a fourth lens with positive refractive power, comprising an object-side surface and an image-side surface, the object-side surface of the fourth lens being convex in a paraxial region thereof, and the image-side surface of the fourth lens being convex in a paraxial region thereof;
a fifth lens with negative refractive power, comprising an object-side surface and an image-side surface, the object-side surface of the fifth lens being concave in a paraxial region thereof, and the image-side surface of the fifth lens being concave in a paraxial region thereof;
a sixth lens with positive refractive power, comprising an object-side surface and an image-side surface, the object-side surface of the sixth lens being convex in a paraxial region thereof, and the image-side surface of the sixth lens being convex in a paraxial region thereof; and
a filter (L7);
wherein a maximum field of view of the optical lens assembly is FOV, a radius of curvature of the object-side surface of the second lens is R3, a radius of curvature of the image-side surface of the third lens is R6, an angle between a chief ray incident on an image plane at a maximum view angle of the optical lens assembly, and a normal line of the image plane is CRA, and the following condition is satisfied: −36.91<FOV*R3/(CRA*R6)<−2.28 (~ -200x14.459/((~18)x11.929).
Yue does not teach the filter is an IR band-pass filter and 1.88 mm2<(TL−BFL)*f<4.40 mm2 (16.5).
Absent any showing of criticality and/or unpredictability, having an IR band-pass filter would have been known to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the purposes of having an IR imaging device.
Accordingly, 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 teaching of Yue by having an IR band-pass filter for the purposes of having an IR imaging device.
Further absent any showing of criticality and/or unpredictability, having 1.88 mm2<(TL−BFL)*f<4.40 mm2 would have been known to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the purposes of having desired size or imaging effects by scaling down the assembly.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the teaching of Yue by having 1.88 mm2<(TL−BFL)*f<4.40 mm2 for the purposes of having desired size or imaging effects by scaling down the assembly.
Regarding claim 15, Yue The optical lens assembly as claimed in claim 1, wherein a focal length of the optical lens assembly is f, the radius of curvature of the object-side surface of the second lens is R3, half of the maximum field of view of the optical lens assembly is HFOV, and the following condition is satisfied: 3.25°<HFOV*f/R3<13.12° (100x1.24/14.459).
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WEN HUANG whose telephone number is (571)270-0234. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F: 9:00AM-4:00PM.
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, Pinping Sun can be reached on (571) 270-1284. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/WEN HUANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872
wen.huang2@uspto.gov
(571)270-0234