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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 11/19/2025 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, 10, and 17 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any interpretation of the 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 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, 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.
Claims 1-7, 10, 11, 13, 14, and 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shirie (2004/0120046, of record) in view of Yang (2016/0161702, of record), henceforth referred to as Yang ‘702.
Regarding claim 1, Shirie discloses a lens module (Figure 2 and Figure 7) comprising: a first lens (22, second lens element) and a second lens (23, third lens element) sequentially disposed along an optical axis of the lens module (L, optical axis) so that the first lens is disposed closest to an object side of the lens module in a direction of the optical axis among the first lens and the second lens ([0023] teaches 21 to 24, first to fourth lens elements, are aligned in order from an objective side); a first spacer disposed between the first lens and the second lens (41, spacer); and a second spacer (40, flare stopper) disposed on the first spacer (Figure 7) and spaced apart from the first lens and the second lens in the direction of the optical axis (Figure 7 depicts 40, flare stopper, is partially spaced apart from 22, second lens element, in the region that it contacts 41, spacer, and is completely spaced apart from 23, third lens element), wherein a portion of the second spacer disposed on the first spacer is disposed closer to the first lens than to the second lens in the direction of the optical axis (Figure 7 depicts 40, flare stopper, is closer to 22, second lens element, in the region that it contacts 41, spacer, than to 23, third lens element), and a remaining portion of a first surface facing toward the object side of the lens module in the direction of the optical axis is a planar surface on which the second spacer is seated (surface of 41, spacer, in direct contact with 40, flare stopper).
Shirie fails to teach a portion of the first surface of the first spacer facing toward the object side of the lens module in the direction of the optical axis is a non-planar surface on which the first lens is seated, and a surface of the first lens contacting the non-planar surface of the first surface of the first spacer is a non-planar surface substantially matching the non-planar surface of the first surface of the first spacer. Shirie and Yang ‘702 are related because both teach a lens module.
Yang ‘702 teaches a lens module wherein a portion of the first surface of the first spacer facing toward the object side of the lens module in the direction of the optical axis is a non-planar surface on which the first lens is seated (Figure 4, 41, coupling protrusion), and a surface of the first lens contacting the non-planar surface of the first surface of the first spacer is a non-planar surface substantially matching the non-planar surface of the first surface of the first spacer (23a, coupling groove).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified Shirie to incorporate the teachings of Yang ‘702 and provide wherein a portion of the first surface of the first spacer facing toward the object side of the lens module in the direction of the optical axis is a non-planar surface on which the first lens is seated, and a surface of the first lens contacting the non-planar surface of the first surface of the first spacer is a non-planar surface substantially matching the non-planar surface of the first surface of the first spacer. Doing so would allow for accurate coupling and alignment of the spacer to the lens.
Regarding claim 2, the modified Shirie discloses the lens module of claim 1, wherein there is a step in the first surface of the first spacer in the direction of the optical axis (step created by 41a, circular groove).
Regarding claim 3, the modified Shirie discloses the lens module of claim 2, wherein the second spacer is disposed on the step (Figure 7).
Regarding claim 4, the modified Shirie discloses the lens module of claim 3, wherein the second spacer extends further toward the optical axis than the first spacer (Figure 7).
Regarding claim 5, the modified Shirie discloses the lens module of claim 1, wherein a thickness of the second spacer in the direction of the optical axis is less than a thickness of the first spacer in the direction of the optical axis (Figure 7).
Regarding claim 6, the modified Shirie discloses the lens module of claim 5, wherein a thickness of the second spacer in the direction of the optical axis is 0.1 mm or less (at least Abstract teaches the flare stopper has a thickness of 0.03 mm).
Regarding claim 7, the modified Shirie discloses the lens module of claim 1, wherein the non-planar surface of the first surface of the first spacer is in surface contact with the non-planar surface of the first lens (Yang ‘702: Figure 4).
Regarding claim 10, Shirie discloses a lens module (Figure 2 and Figure 7) comprising: a lens barrel (27, lens barrel); a plurality of lenses sequentially disposed in the lens barrel (21, first lens element, 22, second lens element, 23, third lens element, 24, fourth lens element; [0023]) along an optical axis of the lens module (L, optical axis); a first spacer disposed between two adjacent lenses among the plurality of lenses (41, spacer, disposed between 22, second lens element, and 23, third lens element) and having a hole formed therein to enable incident light to pass through the plurality of lenses (Figure 3 and Figure 7, central opening/hole); and a second spacer (40, flare stopper) disposed on the first spacer (Figure 7) and spaced apart from the two adjacent lenses in a direction of the optical axis (Figure 7 depicts 40, flare stopper, is partially spaced apart from 22, second lens element, in the region that it contacts 41, spacer, and is completely spaced apart from 23, third lens element), and a second seating surface of the first spacer facing toward the object side of the lens module on which the second spacer is seated is a planar surface (surface of 41, spacer, in direct contact with 40, flare stopper).
Shirie fails to teach a first seating surface of the first spacer facing toward the object side of the lens module and contacting a surface of the one lens is a non-planar surface, and the surface of the one lens contacting the first seating surface is a non-planar surface substantially matching the non-planar surface of the first seating surface. Shirie and Yang ‘702 are related because both teach a lens module.
Yang ‘702 teaches a lens module wherein a first seating surface of the first spacer facing toward the object side of the lens module and contacting a surface of the one lens is a non-planar surface (Figure 4, 41, coupling protrusion), and a surface of the one lens contacting the first seating surface is a non-planar surface substantially matching the non-planar surface of the first seating surface (23a, coupling groove).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified Shirie to incorporate the teachings of Yang ‘702 and provide a first seating surface of the first spacer facing toward the object side of the lens module and contacting a surface of the one lens is a non-planar surface, and the surface of the one lens contacting the first seating surface is a non-planar surface substantially matching the non-planar surface of the first seating surface. Doing so would allow for accurate coupling and alignment of the spacer to the lens.
Regarding claim 11, the modified Shirie discloses the lens module of claim 10, wherein the second seating surface of the first spacer on which the second spacer is seated is farther away from the one lens than the first seating surface of the first spacer (Figure 7 depicts the surface of 41, spacer, in direct contact with 40, flare stopper, is farther from 22, second lens element, than the surface of 41, spacer, that is in direct contact with 22, second lens element).
Regarding claim 13, the modified Shirie discloses the lens module of claim 10, wherein the second seating surface of the first spacer on which the second spacer is seated is recessed from the first seating surface of the first spacer contacting the surface of the one lens in the direction of the optical axis away from the one lens (Figure 7 depicts the surface of 41, spacer, in direct contact with 40, flare stopper, is recessed from the surface of 41, spacer, that is in direct contact with 22, second lens element).
Regarding claim 14, the modified Shirie discloses the lens module of claim 10, wherein the surface of the one lens contacting the first seating surface of the first spacer is an inclined surface or a curved surface (Examiner notes that 22, second lens element, is curved by following circular shape, similarly depicted in Figure 3's shape of the spacer, i.e. in the z plane of Figure 7 there is a curved shape), the first seating surface of the first spacer contacting the surface of the one lens is an inclined surface or a curved surface (Yang: ‘702: Figure 4), and the inclined surface or the curved surface of the surface of the first lens contacting the first seating surface of the first spacer and the inclined surface or the curved surface of the first seating surface of the first spacer are in surface contact with each other (Figure 7).
Regarding claim 17, Shirie discloses a lens module (Figure 2 and Figure 7) comprising: a first lens (22, second lens element) and a second lens (23, third lens element) sequentially disposed along an optical axis of the lens module (L, optical axis; [0023]) so that the first lens is disposed closest to an object side of the lens module in a direction of the optical axis among the first lens and the second lens ([0023]); a first spacer (41, spacer) disposed between the first lens and the second lens along the optical axis (Figure 7); and a second spacer (40, flare stopper) disposed on the first spacer (Figure 7), wherein a portion of the second spacer disposed on the first spacer is disposed closer to the first lens than to the second lens in the direction of the optical axis (Figure 7 depicts 40, flare stopper, is closer to 22, second lens element, in the region that it contacts 41, spacer, than to 23, third lens element), the first spacer comprises: a first surface facing toward the first lens and contacting a surface of the first lens (surface of 41, spacer, in direct contact with surface of 22, second lens element); and a second surface recessed from the first surface of the first spacer in the direction of the optical axis away from the first lens and contacting a surface of the second spacer (surface of 41, spacer, in direct contact with 40, flare stopper), and the second surface of the first spacer is a planar surface (Figure 7 depicts the surface of 41, spacer, that is in direct contact with 40, flare stopper, is planar), and the surface of the second spacer contacting the second surface of the first spacer is a planar surface (Figure 7 depicts the region of 40, flare stopper, that is in direct contact with 41, spacer, is planar).
Shirie fails to teach the first surface of the first spacer is a non-planar surface, and the first of the first lens contacting the first surface of the first spacer is a non-planar surface. Shirie and Yang ‘702 are related because both teach a lens module.
Yang ‘702 teaches the first surface of the first spacer is a non-planar surface (Figure 4, 41, coupling protrusion), and the first of the first lens contacting the first surface of the first spacer is a non-planar surface (23a, coupling groove).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified Shirie to incorporate the teachings of Yang ‘702 and provide wherein the first surface of the first spacer is a non-planar surface, and the first of the first lens contacting the first surface of the first spacer is a non-planar surface. Doing so would allow for accurate coupling and alignment of the spacer to the lens.
Regarding claim 18, the modified Shirie discloses the lens module of claim 17, wherein the first spacer further comprises a third surface substantially parallel to the optical axis and connecting the first surface of the spacer to the second surface of the spacer (41a, circular groove).
Regarding claim 19, the modified Shirie discloses the lens module of claim 17, wherein the surface of the first lens contacting the first surface of the first spacer and the first surface of the first spacer are in surface contact with each other (Yang ‘702: Figure 4).
Claims 8 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shirie (2004/0120046, of record) in view of Yang (2016/0161702, of record), henceforth referred to as Yang ‘702, as applied to claims 1 and 10 above, and further in view of Chen (2009/0147381, of record).
Regarding claim 8, the modified Shirie discloses the lens module of claim 1, but fails to teach wherein the first surface of the first spacer comprises a plurality of protrusions spaced apart from each other, and the plurality of protrusions are in contact with the first lens, and the surface of the first lens contacting the non-planar surface of the first surface of the first spacer comprises a plurality of grooves disposed at positions facing the plurality of protrusions. The modified Shirie and Chen are related because both teach a lens module.
Chen teaches a lens module wherein the first surface of the first spacer comprises a plurality of protrusions spaced apart from each other (Figure 1 depicts 14, spacer, to include 140, surface, which has a roughened surface), and the plurality of protrusions are in contact with the first lens (Figure 1 depicts 12, optical lens, which is adjacent to 14, spacer), and the surface of the first lens contacting the non-planar surface of the first surface of the first spacer comprises a plurality of grooves disposed at positions facing the plurality of protrusions (at least [0017] teaches 12, optical lens, includes 1220, two opposite surfaces which are roughened, thus interpreted to include grooves).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified Shirie to incorporate the teachings of Chen and provide wherein the first surface of the first spacer comprises a plurality of protrusions spaced apart from each other, and the plurality of protrusions are in contact with the first lens, and the surface of the first lens contacting the non-planar surface of the first surface of the first spacer comprises a plurality of grooves disposed at positions facing the plurality of protrusions. Doing so would allow for reducing unwanted reflection, thereby improving imaging quality.
Regarding claim 15, the modified Shirie discloses the lens module of claim 10, wherein the surface of the one lens contacting the first seating surface of the first spacer is an inclined surface or a curved surface (Examiner notes that 22, second lens element, is curved by following circular shape, similarly depicted in Figure 3's shape of the spacer, i.e. in the z plane of Figure 7 there is a curved shape) and the first seating surface of the first spacer contacting the surface of the one lens is an inclined surface or a curved surface (Yang: ‘702: Figure 4).
The modified Shirie fails to teach the first seating surface of the first spacer contacting the surface of the one lens comprises a plurality of protrusions spaced apart from each other, and the surface of the one lens contacting the first seating surface of the first spacer comprises a plurality of grooves accommodating the plurality of protrusions. The modified Shirie and Chen are related because both teach a lens module.
Chen teaches a lens module wherein the first seating surface of the first spacer contacting the surface of the line lens comprises a plurality of protrusions spaced apart from each other (Figure 1 depicts 14, spacer, to include 140, surface, which has a roughened surface), and the surface of the one lens contacting the first seating surface of the first surface comprises a plurality of grooves accommodating the plurality of protrusions (at least [0017] teaches 12, optical lens, includes 1220, two opposite surfaces which are roughened, thus interpreted to include grooves).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified Shirie to incorporate the teachings of Chen and provide the first seating surface of the first spacer contacting the surface of the one lens comprises a plurality of protrusions spaced apart from each other, and the surface of the one lens contacting the first seating surface of the first spacer comprises a plurality of grooves accommodating the plurality of protrusions. Doing so would allow for reducing unwanted reflection, thereby improving imaging quality.
Claims 9 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shirie (2004/0120046, of record) in view of Yang (2016/0161702, of record), henceforth referred to as Yang ‘702, as applied to claims 1 and 17, and further in view of Yang et al. (2021/0302684, of record).
Regarding claim 9, the modified Shirie discloses the lens module of claim 1, but fails to teach wherein an inner side surface of the second spacer facing the optical axis has an undulating shape repeatedly extending toward and away from the optical axis. The modified Shirie and Yang are related because both teach a lens module.
Yang teaches a lens module wherein an inner side surface of the second spacer facing the optical axis has an undulating shape repeatedly extending toward and away from the optical axis (Figure 2, 101, inner side surface, includes 110, protruding portion).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified Shirie to incorporate the teachings of Yang and provide wherein an inner side surface of the second spacer facing the optical axis has an undulating shape repeatedly extending toward and away from the optical axis. Doing so would allow for further prevention of unwanted flare, thereby improving imaging quality.
Regarding claim 20, the modified Shirie discloses the lens module of claim 17, but fails to teach wherein the second spacer has an undulating inner surface facing the optical axis. The modified Shirie and Yang are related because both teach a lens module.
Yang teaches a lens module wherein the second spacer has an undulating inner surface facing the optical axis (Figure 2, 101, inner side surface, includes 110, protruding portion).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified Shirie to incorporate the teachings of Yang and provide wherein the second spacer has an undulating inner surface facing the optical axis. Doing so would allow for further prevention of unwanted flare, thereby improving imaging quality.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shirie (2004/0120046, of record) in view of Yang (2016/0161702, of record), henceforth referred to as Yang ‘702, as applied to claim 10, and further in view of Liu et al. (2022/0128787, of record).
Regarding claim 12, the modified Shirie discloses the lens module of claim 10, but fails to teach wherein the first spacer and the second spacer are made of different materials. The modified Shirie and Liu are related because both teach a lens module.
Liu teaches a lens module wherein the first spacer and the second spacer are made of different materials (at least [0072] teaches the material of SP1, spacer, includes plastic; Shirie: at least [0031] teaches 40, flare stopper, is made of Mylar).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified Shirie to incorporate the teachings of Liu and provide wherein the first spacer and the second spacer are made of different materials. Doing so would allow for improving processing time of the spacer, which avails mass production.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BALRAM T PARBADIA whose telephone number is (571)270-0602. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 am - 5:00 pm, Monday - Friday.
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, Bumsuk Won can be reached at (571) 272-2713. 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.
/BALRAM T PARBADIA/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872