DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . This office action is in response to the amendment filed 6/10/2026.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
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 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.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 3/27/2026 complies with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the examiner considered the information disclosure statement.
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, 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 1-8 and 11-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jung et al. (US20210157104) in view of Hu et al. (US20210271053) and Li et al. (US20210063697, hereinafter called Li’697').
Regarding claim 1, Jung teaches an optical imaging system (Jung, figs. 1-10, abstract, an imaging lens system), comprising:
a first lens (fig. 3, lens 210) having positive refractive power (Jung, fig. 3, paragraph [0080] “The first lens 210 may have positive refractive power”), a second lens (fig. 3, lens 220) having negative refractive power (paragraph [0080] “The second lens 220 may have negative refractive power”), a third lens (fig. 3, lens 230) having negative refractive power (paragraph [0080] “The third lens 230 may have negative refractive power”), a fourth lens (fig. 3, lens 240), a fifth lens (fig. 3, lens 250), a sixth lens (fig. 3, lens 260), a seventh lens (fig. 3, lens 270), and an eighth lens (fig. 3, lens 280) disposed in order from an object side (see fig. 3, and paragraph [0082], data of table 3, lens 210 to lens 280 disposed in order from an object side to the imaging plane IMG),
wherein the sixth lens (fig. 3, lens 260) has negative refractive power (paragraph [0080], The sixth lens 260 may have negative refractive power), a convex object-side surface and a concave image-side surface (paragraph [0080] The sixth lens 260 may have negative refractive power, and have a convex object-side surface and a concave image-side surface),
wherein a refractive index of the second lens (the lens 220, paragraph [0082], data of table 3, the refractive index of the second lens 220 = 1.671) is greater than a refractive index of each of the first lens (the lens 210, paragraph [0082], data of table 3, refractive index of each of the first lens 210 =1.544) and the third lens (the lens 230, paragraph [0082], data of table 3, the refractive index of the third lens 230 = 1.671), and
wherein
0<|f2/f3|<1 (0.3; see paragraph [0099], data of table 11, second example of f2 = -15.788, f3 = -52.452).
1.5<f34/f<5.5 (14.67),
3<|f4/f| (5.12; see paragraph [0099], data of table 11, second example of f4 = 34.274, f = 6.697),
TTL/(2×IMG HT)<0.6 (0.65; see paragraph [0099] data of table 12, second example of conditional expression, TTL/IMGHT = 1.3042);
0<f1/f<1.4 (0.856; see paragraph [0099], data of table 11, second example of f1 = 5.735, f =6.697),
where f2 is a focal length of the second lens (fig. 3, paragraph [0067], f2 is a focal length of the second lens), f3 is a focal length of the third lens (paragraph [0067] , f3 is a focal length of the third lens), and f4 is a focal length of the fourth lens (see paragraph [0099], data of table 11, the focal length of the fourth lens 240 = second example of f4 = 34.274), f34 is a combined focal length of the third lens (the lens 230) and the fourth lens (the lens 240, see paragraph [0099], data of table 11, second example of f3 = -52.452, f4 = 34.274; thus, f34 is approximately 98.3), TTL is a distance on an optical axis from an object-side surface of the first lens to an imaging plane (paragraph [0006] “TTL is a distance from an object-side surface of the first lens to the imaging plane”), IMG HT is half a diagonal length of the imaging plane (paragraph [0006],“ IMGHT is one-half of a diagonal length of the imaging plane”), f is a total focal length of the optical imaging system (paragraph [0012], “f is a focal length of the imaging lens system”), and f1 is a focal length of the first lens (paragraph [0012], “f1 is a focal length of the first lens).
Jung does not explicitly disclose wherein 1.5<f34/f<5.5 (14.67),
However, Hu teaches the analogous optical imaging lens (Hu, fig. 13, paragraph [0116] “As shown in FIG. 13, the optical imaging lens assembly includes a stop STO, a first lens E1, a second lens E2, a third lens E3, a fourth lens E4, a fifth lens E5, a sixth lens E6, a seventh lens E7, an eighth lens E8, an optical filter E9 and an imaging plane S19, which are sequentially arranged from an object side to an image side”; paragraph [0117], The first lens E1 has positive refractive power; “The second lens E2 has negative refractive power”; “The third lens E3 has negative refractive power”, “The sixth lens E6 has negative refractive power”), and further teaches wherein a refractive index of the second lens (Hu, fig. 13, the lens E2, paragraph [0119], data of table 13, the refractive index of the second lens E2 = 1.68) is greater than a refractive index of each of the first lens (Hu, fig. 13, the lens E1, paragraph [0119], data of table 13, refractive index of each of the first lens E1 =1.55) and the third lens (Hu, the lens E3, paragraph [0119], data of table 13, the refractive index of the third lens E3 = 1.55),
1.5<f34/f<5.5 (is approximately 3.6; see paragraph [0118] “a total effective focal length f of the optical imaging lens assembly is 6.70”, paragraph [0119] data of table 13, f3 = -71.20, f4 =18.19, thus, f= 6.7, f34 is approximately 3.6),
where f is a total focal length of the optical imaging system (Hu, fig. 13, paragraph [0118] “a total effective focal length f of the optical imaging lens assembly is 6.70 mm”), f3 is a focal length of the third lens (fig. 13, lens E3, paragraph [0119] data of table 13, f3 = -71.20), and f4 is a focal length of the fourth lens (fig. 13, lens E4, paragraph [0119] data of table 13, f4 =18.19).
Thus, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify focal length of third or fourth lens of Jung to satisfy that f34/f <5.5 as disclosed in similar lens system of Hu for the purpose of having a small total length and good image quality (Hu, paragraph [0023]).
Jung does not explicitly disclose wherein TTL/(2×IMG HT)<0.6 (0.65).
However, Li’697' teaches the analogous optical imaging lens (Li’697', fig. 11, paragraph [0096] “As shown in FIG. 11, the optical imaging lens assembly includes a stop STO, a first lens E1, a second lens E2, a third lens E3, a fourth lens E4, a fifth lens E5, a sixth lens E6, a seventh lens E7, an eighth lens E8, an optical filter E9 and an imaging plane S19, which are sequentially arranged from an object side to an image side along an optical axis”; paragraph [0097] “The first lens E1 has positive refractive power”; “the second lens E2 has negative refractive power”; “The third lens E3 has negative refractive power”; “The sixth lens E6 has negative refractive power, an object-side surface S11 thereof is a convex surface, and an image-side surface S12 thereof is a concave surface”), and further teaches wherein TTL/(2×IMG HT)<0.6 (0.57; paragraph [0098], TTL/(2×IMG HT) = 6.7/(2x5.85)), where TTL is a distance on an optical axis from an object-side surface of the first lens to an imaging plane (Li’697', paragraph [0098] “a distance TTL along the optical axis from the object-side surface S1 of the first lens E1 to the imaging plane S19 satisfies TTL=6.70 mm”), IMG HT is half a diagonal length of the imaging plane (paragraph [0098] “half of a diagonal length ImgH of an effective pixel area on the imaging plane S19 satisfies ImgH = 5.85 mm”).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the distance on an optical axis from an object-side surface of the first lens to an imaging plane of Jung to satisfy that TTL/(2×IMG HT)<0.6 as taught by Li’697' for the purpose to meet the requirements of miniaturization and high imaging quality (Li’697', paragraph [0003]).
Regarding claim 2, combination Jung-Hu-Li’697' discloses the invention as described in Claim 1, Jung further teaches wherein, among the first to eighth lenses (Jung, fig. 3, lens 210 to lens 280), at least three lenses including the second lens (the lens 210) have a refractive index greater than 1.61 (see paragraph [0082], data of table 3, the second lens 220 has a refractive index 1.671, the fifth lens 250 has a refractive index 1.616, the sixth lens 260 has a refractive index 1.616), and
wherein, among the at least three lenses having a refractive index greater than 1.61 (described above, lens 220, lens 250, lens 260 lenses having a refractive index greater than 1.61), an absolute value of a focal length of the second lens is the smallest (data of table 11, second example of f2 = -15.788, f5=-84.707, f6 =-27.493; thus, an absolute value of a focal length of the second lens 220 is the smallest, f2 = 15.788 ).
Regarding claim 3, combination Jung-Hu-Li’697' discloses the invention as described in Claim 2 and Jung further teaches wherein at least one of 25<v1−v2<45 (36.9; see Jung, paragraph [0082], data of table 3, v1 = 56.1, v2 =19.2), v1−v4 <45 (0; see Jung, paragraph [0082], data of table 3, v1 = 56.1, v4 =56.1) and 10<v1−(v6+v7)/2<30 is satisfied (15.15, paragraph [0082], data of table 3, v1 = 56.1, v6 = 25.8, v7 = 56.1), where v1 is an Abbe number of the first lens (Jung, fig. 3, lens 210, the Abbe number v1 of the first lens 210, described above, v1 =56.1), v4 is an Abbe number of the fourth lens (Jung, fig. 3, the Abbe number v4 of the fourth lens 240, described above, v4 = 56.1), v6 is an Abbe number of the sixth lens (Jung, fig. 3, the Abbe number v6 of the sixth lens 260, described above, v6 = 25.8), and v7 is an Abbe number of the seventh lens ((Jung, fig. 3, the Abbe number v7 of the seventh lens 270, described above, v7 = 56.1).
Regarding claim 4, combination Jung-Hu-Li’697' the invention as described in Claim 2 and Jung further teaches wherein the second lens (Jung, fig. 3, lens 220), the fifth lens (the lens 250), and the sixth lens (the lens 260) have a refractive index greater than 1.61 (see Jung, described in claim 2, described above, lens 220, lens 250, lens 260 lenses having a refractive index greater than 1.61), and
wherein 60<v2+v5+v6<80 (70.8; Jung, fig. 3, see paragraph [0082], data of table 3, v2 = 19.2, v5 = 25.8, v6 = 25.8), where v2 is an Abbe number of the second lens (lens 220), v5 is an Abbe number of the fifth lens (the lens 250), and v6 is an Abbe number of the sixth lens (the lens 260).
Regarding claim 5, combination Jung-Hu-Li’697' discloses the invention as described in Claim 4 and Jung further teaches wherein the fifth lens (the lens 250) has negative refractive power (Jung, fig. 3, paragraph [0080] “The fifth lens 250 may have negative refractive power), and
wherein each of the second lens (fig. 3, lens 220) and the fifth lens (the lens 250) has a refractive index greater than 1.66 (see paragraph [0082], data of table 3, the second lens 220 has a refractive index 1.671, the fifth lens 250 has a refractive index 1.616).
Regarding claim 6, combination Jung-Hu-Li’697' discloses the invention as described in Claim 1 and Jung further teaches wherein at least one of
−10<f2/f<−1 (-2.35; see paragraph [0099], data of table 11, second example of f2 = -15.788, f = 6.697); and 1<|f3/f| (7.83; see paragraph [0099], data of table 11, second example of f3 = -52.452) is satisfied,
Regarding claim 7, combination Jung-Hu-Li’697' discloses the invention as described in Claim 6 and Jung further teaches wherein −0.6<f1/f2<0 (-0.36; paragraph [0099], data of table 11, second example of f1 = 5.735, f2 = -15.788).
Regarding claim 8, combination Jung-Hu-Li’697' discloses the invention as described in Claim 7 and Jung further teaches wherein −0.1<f1/f3<1 (-0.1; which is very close to the value of -0.1; the claimed ranges and the prior art ranges are close enough that one skilled in the art would have expected them to have the same properties, See MPEP 2144.05(I);Titanium Metals Corp. of America v. Nabber, 778 F.2d 775, 227 USPQ 773 (Fed. Cir. 1985).).
Regarding claim 11, combination Jung-Hu-Li’697' discloses the invention as described in Claim 1 and Jung further teaches wherein at least one of 3<|f5/f| (12.64; paragraph [0099], data of table 11, second example of f5 = -84.707, f = 6.697); 1<|f6/f|; 0<f7/f<2; and −1<f8/f<0 is satisfied, where f5 is a focal length of the fifth lens (Jung, fig. 3, lens 250, paragraph [0099], data of table 11, focal length of the fifth lens 250 = second example of f5 = -84.707).
Regarding claim 12, combination Jung-Hu-Li’697' discloses the invention as described in Claim 1 and Jung further teaches wherein TTL/f<1.3 (1.17; paragraph [0099], data of table 11, second example of TTL = 7.825, f = 6.697) and BFL/f<0.3 (0.15; paragraph [0099], data of table 11, second example of BFL = 0.974, f= 6.697), where BFL is a distance on the optical axis from an image-side surface of the eighth lens to the imaging surface (Jung, paragraph [0099] “BFL refers to a distance from an image-side surface of the eighth lens to an imaging plane”).
Regarding claim 13, combination Jung-Hu-Li’697' discloses the invention as described in Claim 1 and Jung further teaches wherein 0<D1/f<0.1 (0.004; see Jung, paragraph [0082], data of table 3, D1 = 0.03, f = 6.697), where D1 is a distance on the optical axis from an image-side surface of the first lens (fig. 3, lens 210) to an object-side surface of the second lens (fig. 3, lens 220).
Regarding claim 14, combination Jung-Hu-Li’697' discloses the invention as described in Claim 13 and Jung further teaches wherein 0<D3/f<0.2 (0.02; see Jung, see Jung, paragraph [0082], data of table 3, D3 =0.105, f = 6.697), where D3 is a distance on the optical axis from the image-side surface of the third lens (the lens 230) to an object-side surface of the fourth lens (the lens 240).
Regarding claim 15, combination Jung-Hu-Li’697' discloses the invention as described in Claim 1 and Jung further teaches wherein 70°<FOV×(IMG HT/f) (73.65; see Jung, paragraph [0099], data of table 12, IMG HT/f = second example of 1/(f/IMG HT) = 1/1.116 = 0.896, FOV = 82.2), where FOV is a field of view of the optical imaging system (Jung, paragraph [0014], FOV is a field of view of the imaging lens system).
Regarding claim 16, combination Jung-Hu-Li’697' discloses the invention as described in Claim 1 and Jung further teaches wherein the fourth lens (fig. 3, lens 240) has positive refractive power (paragraph [0080], the fourth lens 240 may have positive refractive power), the fifth lens has negative refractive power (paragraph [0080], The fifth lens 250 may have negative refractive power), the seventh lens has positive refractive power (paragraph [0080], the seventh lens 270 may have positive refractive power,), and the eighth lens has negative refractive power(paragraph [0080], he eighth lens 280 may have negative refractive power).
Response to argument/amendment
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to any of the references or portions of the reference being used in the current rejections.
Examiner's Note
Regarding the references, the Examiner cites particular figures, paragraphs, columns and line numbers in the reference(s), as applied to the claims above. Although the particular citations are representative teachings and are applied to specific limitations within the claims, other passages, internally cited references, and figures may also apply. In preparing a response, it is respectfully requested that the Applicant fully consider the references, in their entirety, as potentially disclosing or teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as fully consider the context of the passage as taught by the reference(s) or as disclosed by the Examiner.
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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KUEI-JEN LEE EDENFIELD whose telephone number is (571)272-3005. The examiner can normally be reached Mon. -Thurs 8:00 am - 5:30 pm.
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 application 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 Services Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199(In USA or Canada) or 571-272-1000.
/KUEI-JEN L EDENFIELD/
Examiner, Art Unit 2872
/WILLIAM R ALEXANDER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Prosecution Insights