Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/205,290

APPARATUS HAVING LENS ASSEMBLY ARRAY AND METHOD USING THE SAME

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Jun 02, 2023
Examiner
KHAN, USMAN A
Art Unit
2637
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
OA Round
2 (Final)
75%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 9m
To Grant
87%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 75% — above average
75%
Career Allow Rate
646 granted / 866 resolved
+12.6% vs TC avg
Moderate +12% lift
Without
With
+12.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
29 currently pending
Career history
895
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
4.1%
-35.9% vs TC avg
§103
46.6%
+6.6% vs TC avg
§102
32.6%
-7.4% vs TC avg
§112
13.0%
-27.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 866 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 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 Arguments Applicant's arguments filed on 12/08/2025 with respect to amended claims 1 –20, also newly added claim 21 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection. Applicant has amended the specification to overcome the objection to the specification provided in the previous office action. 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: 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. 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 – 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KIM (US PgPub No. 20170353634) in view of LEE (US PgPub No. 20200089020). Regarding claim 1, KIM teaches an imaging apparatus (figure 2 item 200), comprising: a lens assembly array comprising a plurality of lens assemblies, each of the plurality of lens assemblies comprising a plurality of individual lenses (figures 2 – 7, item 230 including inside lens assembly array comprising a plurality of lens assemblies and each of the plurality of lens assemblies comprising a plurality of individual lenses; additionally figures 10 – 13, and 15 – 17 variations of array lens setup); an actuator assembly configured to move at least a portion of the plurality of lens assemblies in at least one direction (abstract and paragraphs 0008, 0010, 0012, 0020, 0059 – 0063, 0100, 0105, 0113 – 0114, and/or 0117; actuator(s) provided on at least one side of the first and second lens assemblies to drive the first and second lens assemblies); and a single image sensor configured to generate image data based on light passing through the lens assembly array, the image data comprising a plurality of sub-images corresponding to the plurality of lens assemblies (figure 8B item 250 a single image sensor with sections 250a and 250b sub-images). However, KIM fails to clearly teach wherein the at least one direction comprises a direction parallel to a light incident surface of the single image sensor. LEE, on the other hand teaches wherein the at least one direction comprises a direction parallel to a light incident surface of the single image sensor. More specifically, LEE teaches wherein the at least one direction comprises a direction parallel to a light incident surface of the single image sensor (paragraphs 0007, 0011, 0030, 0079, 0126 – 0127, 0142 – 0144, 0150, 0160, 0170 – 0173, 0190, 0197, 0206, 0237, 0267 - 0268, 0278 – 0279, 0295, 0322 – 0335, 0378, 0403; OIS function). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to incorporate the teachings of LEE with the teachings of KIM because in at least paragraph 0127 LEE teaches that OIS system can be used for offset for vibration, thereby resulting in improved imaging in KIM; at least paragraph 0142 teaches that AF and OIS is used in same system. Regarding claim 2, as mentioned above in the discussion of claim 1, KIM in view of LEE teach all of the limitations of the parent claim. Additionally, KIM teaches wherein a relative position between the plurality of lens assemblies in the lens assembly array is configured to be fixed, wherein the actuator assembly is configured to generate a same movement to the plurality of lens assemblies (abstract and paragraphs 0008, 0010, 0012, 0020, 0059 – 0063, 0100, 0105, 0113 – 0114, and/or 0117; actuator provided on one side of the first and second lens assemblies to drive the first and second lens assemblies; as seen by at least figures 5A – 7, 11 and 13 a relative position between the plurality of lens assemblies in the lens assembly array is configured to be fixed). Regarding claim 3, as mentioned above in the discussion of claim 1, KIM in view of LEE teach all of the limitations of the parent claim. Additionally, KIM teaches wherein the plurality of sub-images is generated through a same focal position according to the same movement (figure 7 items 210 and 220 moving and focusing light to 250a and 250b respectively). Regarding claim 4, as mentioned above in the discussion of claim 1, KIM in view of LEE teach all of the limitations of the parent claim. Additionally, KIM teaches an actuator carrier configured to support the plurality of lens assemblies (figure 3 item 240 supporting item 230; similarly figures 7 items 240a and 240b supporting item 230 also figure 13 item 340a and 340b supporting item 310 and 320), wherein the actuator assembly is configured to generate a movement in the plurality of lens assemblies by moving the actuator carrier in the at least one direction (abstract and paragraphs 0008, 0010, 0012, 0020, 0059 – 0063, 0100, 0105, 0113 – 0114, and/or 0117; actuator provided on one side of the first and second lens assemblies to drive the first and second lens assemblies). Regarding claim 5, as mentioned above in the discussion of claim 4, KIM in view of LEE teach all of the limitations of the parent claim. Additionally, KIM teaches an array holder configured to fix a relative position between the plurality of lens assemblies (figures 3 - 7 holding item 230), wherein the actuator carrier is configured to support the plurality of lens assemblies contained in the array holder ((figure 3 item 240 supporting item 230; similarly figures 7 items 240a and 240b supporting item 230). Regarding claim 6, as mentioned above in the discussion of claim 1, KIM in view of LEE teach all of the limitations of the parent claim. Additionally, KIM teaches wherein a relative position between the plurality of lens assemblies in the lens assembly array is configured to be variable, wherein the actuator assembly is configured to generate a different movement in the plurality of lens assemblies (paragraph 0105 and 0113 - 0118 also figures 12 - 14; each lens moves independently of the other i.e. variable). Regarding claim 7, as mentioned above in the discussion of claim 6, KIM in view of LEE teach all of the limitations of the parent claim. Additionally, KIM teaches wherein, according to the different movement, a first sub-image of the plurality of sub-images is generated through a first focal position and a second sub-image of the plurality of sub-images is generated through a second focal position different from the first focal position (paragraph 0105 and 0113 - 0118 also figures 12 - 14; each lens moves independently of the other i.e. variable creating 2 different focal position sub images different from each other, note the images will be created on item 350 having two different sections as shown in figure 8B items 250a and 250b; also paragraph 0119). Regarding claim 8, as mentioned above in the discussion of claim 1, KIM in view of LEE teach all of the limitations of the parent claim. Additionally, KIM teaches wherein the plurality of lens assemblies is configured to be arranged in close proximity so that the plurality of sub-images is in close contact with each other in the single image sensor (figure 7 items 210 and 220 with respect to items 250a and 250b of 250; 250a and 250b sub-images is in close contact with each other). Regarding claim 9, as mentioned above in the discussion of claim 1, KIM in view of LEE teach all of the limitations of the parent claim. Additionally, KIM teaches wherein the plurality of individual lenses are configured in an arrangement that avoids interference between the plurality of sub-images (figure 7 items 210 and 220 with respect to items 250a and 250b of 250; also figure 11 and/or 13; note: the system avoids interference between the plurality of sub-images). Regarding claim 10, as mentioned above in the discussion of claim 1, KIM in view of LEE teach all of the limitations of the parent claim. Additionally, KIM teaches wherein a number of the plurality of sub-images is configured to correspond to a number of the plurality of lens assemblies (figure 7 items 210 and 220 with respect to items 250a and 250b of 250). Regarding claim 11, as mentioned above in the discussion of claim 1, KIM in view of LEE teach all of the limitations of the parent claim. Additionally, KIM teaches wherein the actuator assembly is configured to perform at least one of an autofocus function and an optical image stabilizer (OIS) function (abstract and paragraphs 0012, 0060; actuator(s) provided on at least one side of the first and second lens assemblies to drive the first and second lens assemblies to provide optical image stabilization and paragraph 0060 teaches actuator 240 serves as a driving unit for autofocusing (AF)). Regarding claim 12, KIM teaches an imaging method (figure 7; imaging), comprising: moving, by an actuator assembly, at least a portion of a lens assembly array comprising a plurality of lens assemblies, each of the plurality of lens assemblies comprising a plurality of individual lenses in at least one direction (figures 2 – 7, item 230 including inside lens assembly array comprising a plurality of lens assemblies and each of the plurality of lens assemblies comprising a plurality of individual lenses; additionally figures 10 – 13, and 15 – 17 variations of array lens setup; also abstract and paragraphs 0008, 0010, 0012, 0020, 0059 – 0063, 0100, 0105, 0113 – 0114, and/or 0117; actuator(s) provided on at least one side of the first and second lens assemblies to drive the first and second lens assemblies); and generating, by a single image sensor, image data comprising a plurality of sub-images corresponding to the plurality of lens assemblies based on light passing through the lens assembly array onto the single image sensor (figure 8B item 250 a single image sensor with sections 250a and 250b sub-images used for generating images). However, KIM fails to clearly teach wherein the at least one direction comprises a direction parallel to a light incident surface of the single image sensor. LEE, on the other hand teaches wherein the at least one direction comprises a direction parallel to a light incident surface of the single image sensor. More specifically, LEE teaches wherein the at least one direction comprises a direction parallel to a light incident surface of the single image sensor (paragraphs 0007, 0011, 0030, 0079, 0126 – 0127, 0142 – 0144, 0150, 0160, 0170 – 0173, 0190, 0197, 0206, 0237, 0267 - 0268, 0278 – 0279, 0295, 0322 – 0335, 0378, 0403; OIS function). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to incorporate the teachings of LEE with the teachings of KIM because in at least paragraph 0127 LEE teaches that OIS system can be used for offset for vibration, thereby resulting in improved imaging in KIM; at least paragraph 0142 teaches that AF and OIS is used in same system. Regarding claim 13, as mentioned above in the discussion of claim 12, KIM in view of LEE teach all of the limitations of the parent claim. Additionally, KIM teaches wherein a relative position between the plurality of lens assemblies in the lens assembly array is configured to be fixed, wherein the moving of at least the portion of the lens assembly array comprises generating a same movement in the plurality of lens assemblies (abstract and paragraphs 0008, 0010, 0012, 0020, 0059 – 0063, 0100, 0105, 0113 – 0114, and/or 0117; actuator provided on one side of the first and second lens assemblies to drive the first and second lens assemblies; as seen by at least figures 5A – 7, 11 and 13 a relative position between the plurality of lens assemblies in the lens assembly array is configured to be fixed). Regarding claim 14, as mentioned above in the discussion of claim 13, KIM in view of LEE teach all of the limitations of the parent claim. Additionally, KIM teaches wherein the plurality of sub-images is generated through a same focal position according to the same movement (figure 7 items 210 and 220 moving and focusing light to 250a and 250b respectively). Regarding claim 15, as mentioned above in the discussion of claim 12, KIM in view of LEE teach all of the limitations of the parent claim. Additionally, KIM teaches wherein a relative position between the plurality of lens assemblies in the lens assembly array is configured to be variable, wherein the moving of at least a portion of the lens assembly array comprises generating a different movement in the plurality of lens assemblies (paragraph 0105 and 0113 - 0118 also figures 12 - 14; each lens moves independently of the other i.e. variable). Regarding claim 16, as mentioned above in the discussion of claim 15, KIM in view of LEE teach all of the limitations of the parent claim. Additionally, KIM teaches wherein a first sub-image of the plurality of sub-images is configured to be generated through a focal position different from a second sub-image of the plurality of sub-images according to the different movement (paragraph 0105 and 0113 - 0118 also figures 12 - 14; each lens moves independently of the other i.e. variable creating 2 different focal position sub images different from each other, note the images will be created on item 350 having two different sections as shown in figure 8B items 250a and 250b; also paragraph 0119). Regarding claim 17, as mentioned above in the discussion of claim 12, KIM in view of LEE teach all of the limitations of the parent claim. Additionally, KIM teaches wherein the plurality of lens assemblies is supported by an actuator carrier (figure 3 item 240 supporting item 230; similarly figures 7 items 240a and 240b supporting item 230 also figure 13 item 340a and 340b supporting item 310 and 320) while the plurality of lens assemblies is contained in an array holder fixing a relative position between the plurality of lens assemblies (figures 3 - 7 holding item 230; figure 3 item 240 supporting item 230; similarly figures 7 items 240a and 240b supporting item 230). Regarding claim 18, as mentioned above in the discussion of claim 12, KIM in view of LEE teach all of the limitations of the parent claim. Additionally, KIM teaches wherein the plurality of lens assemblies is configured to be arranged in close proximity so that the plurality of sub-images is in close contact with each other in the single image sensor (figure 7 items 210 and 220 with respect to items 250a and 250b of 250; 250a and 250b sub-images is in close contact with each other), wherein at least a portion of the plurality of individual lenses causing interference between the plurality of sub-images is removed (figure 7 items 210 and 220 with respect to items 250a and 250b of 250; also figure 11 and/or 13; note: the system avoids interference between the plurality of sub-images). Regarding claim 19, KIM teaches an electronic apparatus (figure 1A – 1C; mobile terminal 100) comprising: a lens assembly array comprising a plurality of lens assemblies, each of the plurality of lens assemblies comprising a plurality of individual lenses (figures 2 – 7, item 230 including inside lens assembly array comprising a plurality of lens assemblies and each of the plurality of lens assemblies comprising a plurality of individual lenses; additionally figures 10 – 13, and 15 – 17 variations of array lens setup); an actuator assembly configured to move at least a portion of the plurality of lens assemblies in at least one direction (abstract and paragraphs 0008, 0010, 0012, 0020, 0059 – 0063, 0100, 0105, 0113 – 0114, and/or 0117; actuator(s) provided on at least one side of the first and second lens assemblies to drive the first and second lens assemblies); an imaging apparatus configured to be arranged on a first side of the lens assembly array, which is opposite to a light incident side, and comprising a single image sensor configured to generate image data corresponding to light passing through the lens assembly array (figure 7; an imaging apparatus configured to be arranged on a first side of the lens assembly array, which is opposite to a light incident side, and comprising a single image sensor configured to generate image data corresponding to light passing through the lens assembly array); and a processor configured to generate an output image based on the image data (figure 1A controller also paragraph 0129). However, KIM fails to clearly teach wherein the at least one direction comprises a direction parallel to a light incident surface of the single image sensor. LEE, on the other hand teaches wherein the at least one direction comprises a direction parallel to a light incident surface of the single image sensor. More specifically, LEE teaches wherein the at least one direction comprises a direction parallel to a light incident surface of the single image sensor (paragraphs 0007, 0011, 0030, 0079, 0126 – 0127, 0142 – 0144, 0150, 0160, 0170 – 0173, 0190, 0197, 0206, 0237, 0267 - 0268, 0278 – 0279, 0295, 0322 – 0335, 0378, 0403; OIS function). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to incorporate the teachings of LEE with the teachings of KIM because in at least paragraph 0127 LEE teaches that OIS system can be used for offset for vibration, thereby resulting in improved imaging in KIM; at least paragraph 0142 teaches that AF and OIS is used in same system. Regarding claim 20, as mentioned above in the discussion of claim 19, KIM in view of LEE teach all of the limitations of the parent claim. Additionally, KIM teaches wherein the image data comprises sub-images corresponding to a number of the plurality of lens assemblies (figure 7 items 210 and 220 with respect to items 250a and 250b of 250)., wherein the processor is configured to generate the output image by synthesizing the sub-images into a single image (paragraphs 0015, 0031, 0090 – 0095; synthesizing images). Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KIM (US PgPub No. 20170353634) in view of LEE (US PgPub No. 20200089020) in view of Aratani (US PgPub No. 20030086013). Regarding claim 18, as mentioned above in the discussion of claim 12, KIM in view of LEE teach all of the limitations of the parent claim. However, KIM in view of LEE fail to clearly teach wherein the light passing through each of the plurality of lens assemblies of the lens assembly array is configured to perform imaging of an array image on an entire sensor plane of the single image sensor. Aratani, on the other hand teaches wherein the light passing through each of the plurality of lens assemblies of the lens assembly array is configured to perform imaging of an array image on an entire sensor plane of the single image sensor. More specifically, Aratani teaches wherein the light passing through each of the plurality of lens assemblies of the lens assembly array is configured to perform imaging of an array image on an entire sensor plane of the single image sensor (figure 4). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to incorporate the teachings of Aratani with the teachings of KIM in view of LEE because in at least paragraph 0071 and 0073 - 0074 Aratani teaches using the system reliability and accuracy and high-speed and large-scale data transmission is improved, thereby improving the system of KIM in view of LEE. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. KANG (US PgPub No. 20220357547) teaches a camera system with lens and processing. Park (US PgPub No. 20160241751) teaches a camera system with lens and processing. 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 Usman A Khan whose telephone number is (571)270-1131. The examiner can normally be reached on M - Th 5:30 AM - 2 PM, F 5:30 AM - Noon. 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, Sinh Tran can be reached on (571)272-7564. 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. Usman Khan /USMAN A KHAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2637 02/08/2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 02, 2023
Application Filed
Sep 05, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Dec 08, 2025
Response Filed
Dec 15, 2025
Interview Requested
Jan 20, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Jan 20, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Feb 08, 2026
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604089
IMAGE CAPTURING APPARATUS HAVING AUDIO RECOGNITION, CONTROL METHOD THEREOF, AND STORAGE MEDIUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12604073
DEVICE AND FILTER ARRAY USED IN SYSTEM FOR GENERATING SPECTRAL IMAGE, SYSTEM FOR GENERATING SPECTRAL IMAGE, AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING FILTER ARRAY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12598376
CAMERA SYSTEM, COMMUNICATION METHOD, SIGNAL PROCESSING DEVICE, AND CAMERA FOR COMMUNICATING VIA DIFFERENT TYPES OF WIRELESS COMMUNICATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12598384
IMAGING DEVICE WITH FILTER SWITCHING, METHOD FOR CONTROLLING THE SAME, AND STORAGE MEDIUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12591169
Remotely controllable mobile video studio with integrated teleprompter, camera, lighting and microphone
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
75%
Grant Probability
87%
With Interview (+12.5%)
2y 9m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 866 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