DETAILED ACTION
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 3/2/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues modifying Lin such that the light absorbing portion is not positioned on an image side surface of the lens would render Lin unsatisfactory for its intended purpose. Examiner respectfully disagrees.
The applicant argues that the combination of Lin and Ishiguri does not disclose all claim limitations and that there is no suggestion or motivation to combine, as doing so would render Lin unsatisfactory for its intended purpose.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. The combination of Lin and Ishiguri teaches or suggests all of the claimed limitations. Specifically, Lin discloses an optical element with a light-absorbing flange, and Ishiguri teaches the structural relationship whereby the optical light-absorbing material does not contact the exit surface of the transparent optical material, thereby preventing blockage of transmitted light. The modification is limited to the placement of the light-absorbing material and does not alter Lin’s intended function or principle of operation.
There is clear motivation for one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the references, as Ishiguri’s configuration improves stray light management without blocking transmitted light, a recognized benefit. Ishiguri does not teach away from Lin, and the combination would not render Lin unsatisfactory for its intended purpose.
Thus, Examiner maintains the rejection.
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 23, 26-28, 30, 33, 34, 36, 38, 40, and 41 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin et al. (2017/0322395, of record) in view of Ishiguri et al. (2014/0334019, of record).
Regarding claim 23, Lin discloses an optical element (Figure 2B, 200, dual molded lens element), comprising: an effective area composed of a transparent optical material (233, effective optical section) that is configured to receive light at an incoming surface of the optical element ([0060]; 201, object-side surface) and transmit the received light toward an exiting surface of the optical element ([0060]; 202, image-side surface); and a flange around the effective area (250, light absorbing portion), wherein at least a portion of the flange is composed of an optical light-absorbing material (250, light absorbing portion) that is in direct contact with at least a portion of a lateral boundary of the effective area (sidewall of 230, light transmitting portion, down to 239, non-circular outer edge), wherein the direct contact is along an entirety of a thickness of the optical element (Figure 2B), the thickness extending along an optical axis from the incoming surface to the exiting surface (Figure 2B), wherein the optical light-absorbing material absorbs at least a portion of light that enters the flange (since 250, light absorbing portion, is provided in the flange area, it is viewed to absorb light that enters the flange area), wherein the optical light-absorbing material comprises a molded material (at least [0059]).
Lin fails to teach wherein the optical light-absorbing material does not contact any surface of the transparent optical material of the optical element that is opposite the incoming surface so as to not block light from exiting any portion of the surface of the transparent optical material of the optical element that is opposite the incoming surface. Ling and Ishiguri are related because both teach a refractive lens with an optical light-absorbing material.
Ishiguri teaches an optical element wherein the optical light-absorbing material does not contact any surface of the transparent optical material of the optical element that is opposite the incoming surface so as to not block light from exiting any portion of the surface of the transparent optical material of the optical element that is opposite the incoming surface (at least Figure 1C, 12, resin light-shielding holder, does not contact 17, lens back surface).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified Lin to incorporate the teachings of Ishiguri and provide wherein the optical light-absorbing material does not contact any surface of the transparent optical material of the optical element that is opposite the incoming surface so as to not block light from exiting any portion of the surface of the transparent optical material of the optical element that is opposite the incoming surface. Doing so would allow for reduction in light absorbing material used while still effectively inhibiting generation of stray light.
Regarding claim 26, the modified Lin discloses the optical element as recited in claim 23, wherein a refractive index of the optical light-absorbing material is higher than a refractive index of the transparent optical material (Examiner notes that since 250, light absorbing portion, has high absorption and low transmittance, by material property the refractive index would necessarily be higher than 220, light transmitting portion, which is transparent).
Regarding claim 27, the modified Lin discloses the optical element as recited in claim 23, wherein the transparent optical material and the optical light-absorbing material are optical plastic materials ([0061]).
Regarding claim 28, the modified Lin discloses the optical element as recited in claim 23, wherein the effective area is an optical prism (Examiner notes that broadly, 200, dual molded lens element, may be considered to be a prism which refracts light, since it is a lens).
Regarding claim 30, Lin discloses a camera (Figure 4; [0080]), comprising: a photosensor configured to capture light projected onto a surface of the photosensor ([0080] teaches an image sensor on or near an image surface); and an optical element (Figure 2B, 200, dual molded lens element) configured to transmit light from an object field located in front of the camera toward the surface of the photosensor (Figure 4; [0080]), wherein the optical element comprises: an effective area composed of a transparent optical material (233, effective optical section) that is configured to receive light at an incoming surface of the optical element ([0060]; 201, object-side surface) and transmit the received light toward the photosensor via an exiting surface of the optical element ([0060]; 202, image-side surface); and a flange at least partially surrounding the effective area (250, light absorbing portion), wherein at least a portion of the flange is composed of an optical light-absorbing material (250, light absorbing portion) that is in direct contact with at least a portion of a lateral boundary of the effective area (sidewall of 230, light transmitting portion, down to 239, non-circular outer edge), wherein the direct contact is along an entirety of a thickness of the optical element (Figure 2B), the thickness extending from the incoming surface to the exiting surface along an optical axis (Figure 2B), wherein the optical light-absorbing material absorbs at least a portion of light that enters the flange (since 250, light absorbing portion, is provided in the flange area, it is viewed to absorb light that enters the flange area), wherein the optical light-absorbing material comprises a molded material (at least [0059]).
Lin fails to teach wherein the optical light-absorbing material does not contact any surface of the transparent optical material of the optical element that is opposite the incoming surface so as to not block light from exiting any portion of the surface of the transparent optical material of the optical element that is opposite the incoming surface. Ling and Ishiguri are related because both teach a refractive lens with an optical light-absorbing material.
Ishiguri teaches an optical element wherein the optical light-absorbing material does not contact any surface of the transparent optical material of the optical element that is opposite the incoming surface so as to not block light from exiting any portion of the surface of the transparent optical material of the optical element that is opposite the incoming surface (at least Figure 1C, 12, resin light-shielding holder, does not contact 17, lens back surface).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified Lin to incorporate the teachings of Ishiguri and provide wherein the optical light-absorbing material does not contact any surface of the transparent optical material of the optical element that is opposite the incoming surface so as to not block light from exiting any portion of the surface of the transparent optical material of the optical element that is opposite the incoming surface. Doing so would allow for reduction in light absorbing material used while still effectively inhibiting generation of stray light.
Regarding claim 33, the modified Lin discloses the camera as recited in claim 30, wherein a refractive index of the optical light-absorbing material is higher than a refractive index of the transparent optical material (Examiner notes that since 250, light absorbing portion, has high absorption and low transmittance, by material property the refractive index would necessarily be higher than 220, light transmitting portion, which is transparent).
Regarding claim 34, the modified Lin discloses the camera as recited in claim 30, wherein the transparent optical material and the optical light-absorbing material are optical plastic materials ([0061]).
Regarding claim 36, the modified Lin discloses the camera as recited in claim 30, wherein the optical element has refractive power to refract the received light toward an image plane at or near the surface of the photosensor (at least [0007, 0009, 0080]).
Regarding claim 38, the modified Lin discloses the camera as recited in claim 30, wherein the effective area is an optical prism (Examiner notes that broadly, 200, dual molded lens element, may be considered to be a prism which refracts light since it is a lens).
Regarding claim 40, Lin discloses a method (Figures 2B and 4; [0080]), comprising: receiving, by an optical element of a camera, light from an object field of a camera comprising the optical element and a photosensor ([0080]), wherein the optical element comprises: an effective area composed of a transparent optical material (233, effective optical section) that is configured to receive light at an incoming surface of the optical element ([0060]; 201, object-side surface) and transmit the received light toward an exiting surface of the optical element ([0060]; 202, image-side surface); and a flange at least partially surrounding the effective area (250, light absorbing portion), wherein at least a portion of the flange is composed of an optical light-absorbing material (250, light absorbing portion) that is in direct contact with at least a portion of a lateral boundary of the effective area (sidewall of 230, light transmitting portion, down to 239, non-circular outer edge), wherein the direct contact is along an entirety of a thickness of the optical element (Figure 2B), the thickness extending from the incoming surface to the exiting surface along the optical axis (Figure 2B), wherein the optical light-absorbing material comprises a molding material (at least [0059]); absorbing, by the flange, at least a portion of the received light that enters the flange (since 250, light absorbing portion, is provided in the flange area, it is viewed to absorb light that enters the flange area); and transmitting, by the effective area, at least a portion of the received light that has entered the effective area from the exiting surface toward a surface of the photosensor ([0060, 0080]).
Lin fails to teach wherein the optical light-absorbing material does not contact any surface of the transparent optical material of the optical element that is opposite the incoming surface so as to not block light from exiting any portion of the surface of the transparent optical material of the optical element that is opposite the incoming surface. Ling and Ishiguri are related because both teach a refractive lens with an optical light-absorbing material.
Ishiguri teaches an optical element wherein the optical light-absorbing material does not contact any surface of the transparent optical material of the optical element that is opposite the incoming surface so as to not block light from exiting any portion of the surface of the transparent optical material of the optical element that is opposite the incoming surface (at least Figure 1C, 12, resin light-shielding holder, does not contact 17, lens back surface).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified Lin to incorporate the teachings of Ishiguri and provide wherein the optical light-absorbing material does not contact any surface of the transparent optical material of the optical element that is opposite the incoming surface so as to not block light from exiting any portion of the surface of the transparent optical material of the optical element that is opposite the incoming surface. Doing so would allow for reduction in light absorbing material used while still effectively inhibiting generation of stray light.
Regarding claim 41, the modified Lin discloses the method of claim 40, further comprising refracting, by the effective area, the light that has entered the effective area, wherein the light that has been refracted forms an image at an image plane at or near the surface of the photosensor ([0060, 0080]).
Claims 24 and 31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin et al. (2017/0322395, of record) in view of Ishiguri et al. (2014/0334019, of record), as applied to claims 23 and 30 above, and further in view of Huang et al. (2016/0313472, of record).
Regarding claim 24, the modified Lin discloses the optical element as recited in claim 23, but fails to teach wherein the optical light-absorbing material absorbs light in a visible portion of the spectrum while transmitting at least a portion of light in an infrared portion of the spectrum. The modified Lin and Huang are related because both teach a lens system.
Huang teaches an optical element wherein the optical light-absorbing material absorbs light in a visible portion of the spectrum while transmitting at least a portion of light in an infrared portion of the spectrum (at least [0037] teaches 222, light absorbing portion, can absorb visible light and is transparent to infrared light).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have further modified Lin to incorporate the teachings of Huang and provide wherein the optical light-absorbing material absorbs light in a visible portion of the spectrum while transmitting at least a portion of light in an infrared portion of the spectrum. Doing so would allow for improved stray light control by reducing unwanted stray light within the lens itself.
Regarding claim 31, the modified Lin discloses the camera as recited in claim 30, but fails to teach wherein the optical light-absorbing material absorbs light in a visible portion of the spectrum while transmitting at least a portion of light in an infrared portion of the spectrum. The modified Lin and Huang are related because both teach a lens system.
Huang teaches an optical element wherein the optical light-absorbing material absorbs light in a visible portion of the spectrum while transmitting at least a portion of light in an infrared portion of the spectrum (at least [0037] teaches 222, light absorbing portion, can absorb visible light and is transparent to infrared light).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have further modified Lin to incorporate the teachings of Huang and provide wherein the optical light-absorbing material absorbs light in a visible portion of the spectrum while transmitting at least a portion of light in an infrared portion of the spectrum. Doing so would allow for improved stray light control by reducing unwanted stray light within the lens itself.
Claims 25 and 32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin et al. (2017/0322395, of record) in view of Ishiguri et al. (2014/0334019, of record), as applied to claims 23 and 30 above, and further in view of Ogawa (2017/0090081, of record).
Regarding claim 25, the modified Lin discloses the optical element as recited in claim 23, but fails to teach wherein the optical light-absorbing material absorbs light in a visible portion of the spectrum and light in an infrared portion of the spectrum. The modified Lin and Ogawa are related because both teach a refractive lens with an optical light-absorbing material.
Ogawa teaches an optical element wherein the optical light-absorbing material absorbs light in a visible portion of the spectrum and light in an infrared portion of the spectrum ([0124] teaches a light absorbing film for absorbing at least one of visible and infrared light, thus teaching absorption of visible and infrared light).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have further modified Lin to incorporate the teachings of Ogawa and provide wherein the optical light-absorbing material absorbs light in a visible portion of the spectrum and light in an infrared portion of the spectrum. Doing so would allow for improved reduction of unwanted glare and stray light, thereby improving image quality.
Regarding claim 32, the modified Lin discloses the camera as recited in claim 30, but fails to teach wherein the optical light-absorbing material absorbs light in a visible portion of the spectrum and light in an infrared portion of the spectrum. The modified Lin and Ogawa are related because both teach a refractive lens with an optical light-absorbing material.
Ogawa teaches an optical element wherein the optical light-absorbing material absorbs light in a visible portion of the spectrum and light in an infrared portion of the spectrum ([0124] teaches a light absorbing film for absorbing at least one of visible and infrared light, thus teaching absorption of visible and infrared light).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have further modified Lin to incorporate the teachings of Ogawa and provide wherein the optical light-absorbing material absorbs light in a visible portion of the spectrum and light in an infrared portion of the spectrum. Doing so would allow for improved reduction of unwanted glare and stray light, thereby improving image quality.
Claims 29, 37, and 39 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin et al. (2017/0322395, of record) in view of Ishiguri et al. (2014/0334019, of record), as applied to claims 23 and 30 above, and further in view of Asami et al. (2016/0011403, of record).
Regarding claim 29, the modified Lin discloses the optical element as recited in claim 23, but fails to teach wherein the effective area is an optical filter. The modified Lin and Asami are related because both teach an optical element.
Asami teaches an optical element wherein the effective area is an optical filter ([0155] teaches a material for forming the lens may be a material that absorbs ultraviolet light, blue light, or infrared light).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have further modified Lin to incorporate the teachings of Asami and provide wherein the effective area is an optical filter. Doing so would allow for improved imaging quality by eliminating unwanted wavelengths of light to pass through to the image sensor or subsequent components.
Regarding claim 37, the modified Lin discloses the camera as recited in claim 30, but fails to teach at least one aperture stop. The modified Lin and Asami are related because both teach a camera.
Asami teaches a camera comprising at least one aperture stop (Figure 1, St, aperture stop).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have further modified Lin to incorporate the teachings of Won and provide at least one aperture stop. Doing so would allow for shading suppression, thereby improving image quality.
Regarding claim 39, the modified Lin discloses the camera as recited in claim 38, but fails to teach wherein the effective area is an optical filter. The modified Lin and Asami are related because both teach an optical element.
Asami teaches an optical element wherein the effective area is an optical filter ([0155] teaches a material for forming the lens may be a material that absorbs ultraviolet light, blue light, or infrared light).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have further modified Lin to incorporate the teachings of Asami and provide wherein the effective area is an optical filter. Doing so would allow for improved imaging quality by eliminating unwanted wavelengths of light to pass through to the image sensor or subsequent components.
Claim 35 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin et al. (2017/0322395, of record) in view of Ishiguri et al. (2014/0334019, of record), as applied to claim 30 above, and further in view of Nakata et al. (4,971,423, of record).
Regarding claim 35, the modified Lin discloses the camera as recited in claim 30, but fails to teach wherein the transparent optical material and the optical light-absorbing material are composed of glass materials. The modified Lin and Nakata are related because both teach a transparent optical material and optical light-absorbing material.
Nakata teaches an optical element wherein the transparent optical material and the optical light-absorbing material are composed of glass materials (col 3 lines 51-55, col 4 lines 9-12).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have further modified Lin to incorporate the teachings of Won and provide wherein the transparent optical material and the optical light-absorbing material are composed of glass materials. Doing so would allow for improved clarity and durability to scratches. Furthermore, it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416; see also Ballas Liquidating Co. v. Allied Indus. of Kansas, Inc. (DC Kans) 205 USPQ 331.
Claim 42 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin et al. (2017/0322395, of record) in view of Ishiguri et al. (2014/0334019, of record), as applied to claim 40 above, and further in view of Wang et al. (2019/0064399, of record).
Regarding claim 42, the modified Lin discloses the method of claim 40, but fails to teach filtering, by an infrared filter, the light transmitted from the effective area toward the surface of the photosensor. The modified Lin and Wang are related because both teach a camera.
Wang teaches a method comprising filtering, by an infrared filter, the light transmitted from the effective area toward the surface of the photosensor (21, color filter; [0115] teaches 21, color filter, may be an infrared cut-off filter).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have further modified Lin to incorporate the teachings of Wang and provide filtering, by an infrared filter, the light transmitted from the effective area toward the surface of the photosensor. Doing so would allow for improved imaging quality by removing unwanted wavelengths of light.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 BUMSUK WON whose telephone number is (571)272-2713. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 7 AM - 5 PM EST.
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, Allana L Bidder can be reached at (571) 272-5560. 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.
/BUMSUK WON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Prosecution Insights