Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/987,136

Hybrid Lens and Method for Manufacturing Hybrid Lens

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Nov 15, 2022
Examiner
HUANG, WEN
Art Unit
2872
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Daicel Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
82%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 10m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 82% — above average
82%
Career Allow Rate
448 granted / 550 resolved
+13.5% vs TC avg
Strong +24% interview lift
Without
With
+24.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
32 currently pending
Career history
582
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
42.4%
+2.4% vs TC avg
§102
32.9%
-7.1% vs TC avg
§112
13.3%
-26.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 550 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 . Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election without traverse of claims 1,10-12,34-37,42-43 in the reply filed on 12/8/25 is acknowledged. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 34-37,42-43 is/are rejected under at least one of 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (2) as being anticipated by Kishinami (US 20120183288, of record). PNG media_image1.png 492 378 media_image1.png Greyscale Regarding claim 34, Kishinami teaches A hybrid lens comprising: a glass substrate (12); a resin lens (16a) provided on at least one surface of the glass substrate; an adhesive layer (15) provided between the glass substrate and the resin lens; and a metal compound layer (18a, [84], “chromium oxide”) provided between the glass substrate and the resin lens. Regarding claim 35, Kishinami further teaches The hybrid lens according to claim 34, wherein the metal compound layer is a black layer ([84], “black”). Regarding claim 36, Kishinami further teaches The hybrid lens according to claim 34, wherein the metal compound layer comprises a metal oxide ([84], “chromium oxide”). Regarding claim 37, Kishinami further teaches The hybrid lens according to claim 34, wherein the metal compound layer comprises a chromium compound ([84], “chromium oxide”). Regarding claim 42, Kishinami further teaches (Fig. 1) The hybrid lens according to claim 34, wherein the adhesive layer joins the metal compound layer and the resin lens. Regarding claim 43, Kishinami further teaches (Fig. 1) The hybrid lens according to claim 34, wherein the metal compound layer is provided on a surface of the glass substrate. 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) 1,10-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kishinami in view of Iyer (US 20120229754), and further in view of HIDEYUKI (JP 2009114390, as evidenced by the translation, all of record). Regarding claim 1, Kishinami teaches (Fig. 1) A hybrid lens comprising: a glass substrate (12); a resin lens (16a) provided on at least one surface of the glass substrate; and an adhesive layer (15) provided between the glass substrate and the resin lens. Kishinami does not explicitly teach a glass transition temperature of the resin lens is higher than a glass transition temperature of the adhesive layer, and a difference between the glass transition temperature of the resin lens and the glass transition temperature of the adhesive layer is from 97 to 150° C. However, in an analogous optics field of endeavor, Iyer teaches ([6], “the adhesive layer may be a visco-elastic material and have a glass transition temperature in the range of 0-20.degree. C”) a glass transition temperature of an adhesive layer is 0-20° C. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of Kishinami and Iyer for the purposes of reducing the stress of the resin lens for broad temperature range application. Further, in an analogous optics field of endeavor, HIDEYUKI teaches (Table 2, Comparative example 1, 141, “ガラス転移温度”means glass transition temperature) a glass transition temperature of a resin is 141° C. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of HIDEYUKI and Kishinami in view of Iyer such that a glass transition temperature of the resin lens is higher than a glass transition temperature of the adhesive layer (141 vs 0-20), and a difference between the glass transition temperature of the resin lens and the glass transition temperature of the adhesive layer is from 97 to 150° C (from 121 to 141) for the purposes of higher temperature environment application. Regarding claim 10, Kishinami further teaches The hybrid lens according to claim 1, wherein a black layer (18a in Fig. 1, [84], “black”) is provided between the glass substrate and the adhesive layer. Regarding claim 11, Kishinami further teaches The hybrid lens according to claim 10, wherein the black layer comprises a metal compound ([84], “chromium oxide”). Regarding claim 12, Kishinami further teaches The hybrid lens according to claim 10, wherein the adhesive layer joins the black layer and the resin lens (Fig. 1). Conclusion 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
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 15, 2022
Application Filed
Feb 15, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601896
OPTICAL CAMERA LENS ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12591117
IMAGING LENS SYSTEM INCLUDING EIGHT LENSES OF +--++-+-, +--+--+- OR +---+-+- REFRACTIVE POWERS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12587728
COMPACT DOUBLE FOLDED TELE CAMERAS INCLUDING FOUR LENSES OF +-+-, +-++ OR +--+; OR SIX LENSES OF +-+-+- OR +-+--- REFRACTIVE POWERS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12585085
OPTICAL CAMERA LENS ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12585090
LOW TOTAL TRACK LENGTH LENS ASSEMBLY INCLUDING SEVEN LENSES OF +-+-++- REFRACTIVE POWERS FOR LARGE SENSOR FORMAT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
82%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+24.4%)
2y 10m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 550 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month