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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 04/28/2026 has been entered.
Information Disclosure Statement
Acknowledgement is made of receipt of Information Disclosure Statement (PTO-1449) filed 03/24/2026 and 06/11/2026. An initialed copy is attached to this Office Action.
Response to Amendment
Claims 1 and 17-18 are amended and claims 19-21 are new.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 and 17-18 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 16 recites the limitation “a sixth lens unit” in line 3 and is dependent on claim 1 which recites the limitation “wherein a total number of lens groups is five or less” in line 5. For examination purposes “a fifth lens unit” will be interpreted as the “final lens unit” as described in claim 1.
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1, 4-8, 10-19 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mizuma et al. (US 20200341288 A1) in view of Miyagawa et al. (US 20190018229 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Mizuma discloses in at least example 1 (figs. 1-3B and table [0086]), an optical system (optical system OL fig. 1) comprising, in order from an object side to an image side (in
order from the object side to the image plane side paragraph [0071]), a first lens unit (first lens unit L1 fig. 1), a second lens unit (second lens unit L2 fig. 1), a third lens unit (third lens unit L3 fig. 1), and a fourth lens unit (fourth lens unit L4 fig. 1),
wherein each distance between adjacent lens units changes during focusing from infinity to a close distance (a distance between adjacent lens units is changed in focusing In focusing from infinity to a closest distance paragraph [0029]),
wherein a total number of lens units disposed in the optical system is five or less (there are five lens groups L1-l5 in the optical system OL fig. 1),
wherein the first lens unit (first lens unit L1 fig. 1) includes four or more positive lenses (first lens unit L1 includes surfaces 1-11 where the lenses with surfaces 1-2 have a focal length of 135.12, surfaces 3-4 have a focal length of 125.67, surfaces 7-8 have a focal length of 50.76 and surfaces 10-11 have a focal length of 57.5 as a result of matrix calculations from table [0086])
wherein, in the first lens unit (first lens unit L1 fig. 1), a lens closest to the object side (surfaces 1-2 is the lens closet to the object side table [0086]) and a lens second closest to the object side (surfaces 3-4 is the lens second closet to the object side table [0086]) are positive lenses (surfaces 1-2 have a focal length of 135.12 and surfaces 3-4 have a focal length of 125.67 as a result of matrix calculations from table [0086]),
wherein the optical system (optical system OL fig. 1) further comprises:
an aperture stop (stop SP fig. 1) disposed on the image side (the stop SP is on the image side of the second lens unit L2 fig. 1) of the second lens unit (second lens unit L2 fig. 1);
a final lens unit (fifth lens unit L5 fig. 1) disposed closest to (the fifth lens unit L5 is closest to the image plane fig. 1) an image plane (image plane IP fig. 1) in the optical system (optical system OL fig. 1), the first lens unit (first lens unit L1 fig. 1) and the final lens unit (fifth lens unit L5 fig. 1) being fixed relative to (the first lens unit L1 and fifth lens L5 unit are fixed during focusing while the second lens unit L2 and fourth lens unit L4 are moved fig. 1) the image plane (image plane IP fig. 1) during the focusing (focusing from infinity to the closest distance paragraph [0072]); and
focus lens units (the second lens unit L2 and the fourth lens unit L4 fig. 1) disposed on the object side (the second lens unit L2 is on the object side of the stop SP fig. 1) and the image side (the fourth lens unit L4 is on the image side of the stop SP fig. 1) of the aperture stop (stop SP fig. 1) and movable during the focusing (the first focus lens unit LF1 (the second lens unit L2) and the second focus lens unit LF2 (the fourth lens unit L4) are moved toward the image plane in focusing from infinity to the closest distance paragraph [0072]),
wherein a focus lens unit (second lens unit L2 fig. 1) closest to the object side (the second lens unit L2 is the closet the object side fig. 1) among the focus lens units (the second lens unit L2 and the fourth lens unit L4 fig. 1) consists of a cemented lens (the second lens unit L2 includes surfaces 12-16 and surfaces 14-16 are a cemented lens table [0086]),
wherein a focus lens unit (the fourth lens unit L4 fig. 1) closest to (the fourth lens unit is closes to the image plane IP fig, 1) the image plane (image plane IP fig. 1) among the focus lens units (the second lens unit L2 and the fourth lens unit L4 fig. 1) moves toward the image side during the focusing (the second focus lens unit LF2 (the fourth lens unit L4) is moved toward the image plane in focusing from infinity to the closest distance paragraph [0072]),
wherein the optical system (optical system OL fig. 1) is configured to increase an absolute value of an imaging magnification at a shortest imaging distance to 0.5 times or higher (a macro lens is expected to have high optical performance for imaging an object in a close distance where an imaging magnification is 0.5 times or more paragraph [0002], β is the lateral magnification of the system paragraph [0047] and lβl >= 0.5 paragraph [0046]),
wherein the final lens unit (fifth lens unit L5 fig. 1) includes a positive lens (the fifth lens unit L5 includes surfaces 26-29 and surfaces 28-29 have a focal length of 53.27 as a result of matrix calculations from table [0086]) and a negative lens (the fifth lens unit L5 includes surfaces 26-29 and surfaces 26-27 have a focal length of -21.41 as a result of matrix calculations from table [0086]), and
wherein the following inequalities are satisfied:
0.025 < dF/L (dF/L = 0.11 as a result of the values below)
0.1 < If4/fl < 0.9 (If4/fl = 0.70 as a result of the values below)
0.0 < If1/fLI < 1.0 (If1/fLI = 0.54 as a result of the values below)
(0.50 < l(1-βis) βr l< 2.00 paragraph [0047])
where dF is a sum of distances on an optical axis from a lens surface closest to an object to a lens surface closest to the image plane in each of the focus lens units (df = d surfaces 12-15 + d surfaces 23-24 = 8.04 + 5.42 = 13.46 table [0086]), L is an overall lens length of the optical system (overall lens length = 123.69 table [0086]), f4 is a focal length of the fourth lens unit (f4 = -56.52 table [0086]), f is a focal length of the optical system (focal length = 80.45 table [0086]), fl is a focal length of the first lens unit (f1 = 46.23 table [0086]), fL is a focal length of the final lens unit (f5 = -85.63 table [0086]), βf is a lateral magnification of the focus lens unit closest to the object side among the focus lens units ("βis" is a lateral magnification of the second partial unit Llb paragraph [0047]), and pr is a combined lateral magnification of all lens units disposed on the image side of the focus lens unit closest to the object side among the focus lens units ("βr" is a composite lateral magnification of all lenses arranged on the image plane side of the second partial unit Llb paragraph [0047]).
Mizuma does not explicitly disclose, wherein the following inequalities are satisfied:
dF/L < 0.099
0.1 < I(1-βf2)xβr2-- I < 5.1I
Where βf is a lateral magnification of the focus lens unit closest to the image plane among the focus lens units, and pr is a combined lateral magnification of all lens units disposed on the image side of the focus lens unit closest to the image plane among the focus lens units.
However It is a well-established proposition that a prima facie case of obviousness exists where
the claimed ranges or amounts do not overlap with the prior art but are merely close. Titanium Metals
Corp. of America v. Banner, 778 F.2d 775, 783, 227 USPQ 773, 779 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (Court held as proper
a rejection of a claim directed to an alloy of "having 0.8% nickel, 0.3% molybdenum, up to 0.1% iron,
balance titanium" as obvious over a reference disclosing alloys of 0.75% nickel, 0.25% molybdenum,
balance titanium and 0.94% nickel, 0.31% molybdenum, balance titanium. "The proportions are so close
that prima facie one skilled in the art would have expected them to have the same properties."). See
M PEP §2144.05.
In the instant case, the prior art teaches a value of dF/L = 0.11 which is so close to the claimed
range of 0.025 < dF/L < 0.099 that prima facie one skilled in the art would have expected them to have
the same properties. Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to choose dF/L such that .025 < dF/L < 0.099 since it has
been held that a prima facie case of obviousness exists where the claimed ranges or amounts do not
overlap with the prior art but are merely close. Titanium Metals Corp. of America v. Banner, 778 F.2d
775, 783, 227 USPQ 773, 779 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (Court held as proper a rejection of a claim directed to an
alloy of "having 0.8% nickel, 0.3% molybdenum, up to 0.1% iron, balance titanium" as obvious over a
reference disclosing alloys of0.75% nickel, 0.25% molybdenum, balance titanium and 0.94% nickel,
0.31% molybdenum, balance titanium. "The proportions are so close that prima facie one skilled in the
art would have expected them to have the same properties."). See MPEP §2144.05.
Additionally Miyagawa discloses in at least example 1 (fig.1, tables 1-3 and 10) , wherein the following inequalities are satisfied:
0.1 < I (1-βf) x βr2 I < 5.1 (l(1-βt52) x βt62l = 4.499 table 10)
Where Bf is a lateral magnification of the focus lens unit closest to the image plane among the focus lens units (βt5 denotes a lateral magnification of the fifth lens group G5 paragraph [0055]), and Br is a combined lateral magnification of all lens units disposed on the image side of the focus lens unit closest to the image plane among the focus lens units (βt6 denotes a lateral magnification of the sixth lens group G6).
Therefore it would be obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have a lateral magnification of the image side focal lens satisfy the equation. Satisfying the conditional expression (3) makes it possible not only to shorten a total length of an optical system, but also to properly correct various aberrations throughout an entire region of object distance (paragraph [0057]).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Mizuma and Miyagawa discloses all the limitations of claim 1 and Mizuma further discloses, wherein the following inequality is satisfied:
0.8 < L/f < 2.4 (L/f = 1.54 as a result of the values above).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Mizuma and Miyagawa discloses all the limitations of claim 1 and Mizuma further discloses, wherein the following inequality is satisfied:
0.2 <f1/f < 1.3 (f1/f = 0.57 as a result of the values above and below)
where f1 is a focal length of the first lens unit (f1 = 46.23 table [0086]).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Mizuma and Miyagawa discloses all the limitations of claim 1 and Mizuma further discloses, wherein the following inequality is satisfied:
0.1 < If2/fl< 2.5 (If2/fl = 0.42 as a result of the values above and below)
where f2 is a focal length of the second lens unit (f2 = -33.58 table [0086]).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Mizuma and Miyagawa discloses all the limitations of claim 1 and Mizuma further discloses, wherein the following inequality is satisfied:
0.2 < If3/fl< 0.8 If3/fl = 0.34 as a result of the values above and below)
where f3 is a focal length of the third lens unit (f3 = 27.12 table [0086]).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Mizuma and Miyagawa discloses all the limitations of claim 1 and Mizuma further discloses, wherein each of the focus lens units consists of four lenses or less (L2 consists of 3 lenses from surfaces 11-16 and L4 consists of 2 lenses from surfaces 22-25 table [0086]).
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Mizuma and Miyagawa discloses all the limitations of claim 1 and Mizuma further discloses, wherein the first lens unit has positive refractive power (the first lens unit L1 having the positive refractive power paragraph [0078]).
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Mizuma and Miyagawa discloses all the limitations of claim 1 and Mizuma further discloses, wherein the number of focus lens units (the second lens unit L2 and the fourth lens unit L4 fig. 1) disposed on the object side of the aperture stop (stop SP fig. 1) among the focus lens units (the second lens unit L2 and the fourth lens unit L4 fig. 1) is one (the second lens unit L2 is the only focus lens unit on the object side of the stop SP fig. 1), and the number of focus lens units (the second lens unit L2 and the fourth lens unit L4 fig. 1) disposed on the image side of the aperture stop (stop SP fig. 1) among the focus lens units (the second lens unit L2 and the fourth lens unit L4 fig. 1) is one (the fourth lens unit L4 is the only focus lens unit on the image side of the stop SP fig. 1).
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Mizuma and Miyagawa discloses all the limitations of claim 1 and Mizuma further discloses, wherein one of focus lens units (the second lens unit L2 and the fourth lens unit L4 fig. 1) disposed on the image side (the fourth lens unit L4 is the only focus lens unit on the image side of the stop SP fig. 1) of the aperture stop (stop SP fig. 1) and closest to the object among the focus lens units (the fourth lens unit L4 is the only focus lens unit on the image side of the stop SP fig. 1) has negative refractive power (the fourth lens unit L4 having the negative refractive power paragraph [0078]).
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Mizuma and Miyagawa discloses all the limitations of claim 1 and Mizuma further discloses, wherein the first lens unit (first lens unit L1 fig. 1) includes a subunit configured to move in a direction including a component orthogonal to the optical axis during image stabilization (the second partial unit L1b is moved in the direction including a component in the perpendicular direction with respect to the optical axis in the image blur correction paragraph [0080]).
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Mizuma and Miyagawa discloses all the limitations of claim 1 and Mizuma further discloses, wherein the optical system consists of, in order from the object side to the image side (in order from the object side to the image plane side paragraph [0071]), the first lens unit (first lens unit L1 fig. 1), the second lens unit (second lens unit L2 fig. 1), the aperture stop (stop SP fig. 1), the third lens unit (third lens unit L3 fig. 1), and the fourth lens unit (fourth lens unit L4 fig. 1), and wherein the aperture stop (stop SP fig. 1) is fixed relative to (the stop SP is not part of the focus lens groups that move during focusing fig. 1) the image plane (image plane IP fig. 1) during the focusing (In focusing from infinity to a closest distance paragraph [0029]).
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Mizuma and Miyagawa discloses all the limitations of claim 1 and Mizuma further discloses, wherein the optical system consists of, in order from the object side to the image side (in order from the object side to the image plane side paragraph [0071]), the first lens unit (first lens unit L1 fig. 1), the second lens unit (second lens unit L2 fig. 1), , the third lens unit (third lens unit L3 fig. 1), and the fourth lens unit (fourth lens unit L4 fig. 1), and a fifth lens unit (fifth lens unit L5 fig. 1).
Regarding claim 16, the combination of Mizuma and Miyagawa discloses all the limitations of claim 1 and Mizuma further discloses, wherein the optical system consists of, in order from the object side to the image side (in order from the object side to the image plane side paragraph [0071]), the first lens unit (first lens unit L1 fig. 1), the second lens unit (second lens unit L2 fig. 1), the third lens unit (third lens unit L3 fig. 1), the fourth lens unit (fourth lens unit L4 fig. 1), a fifth lens unit (fifth lens unit L5 fig. 1), and a sixth lens unit (fifth lens unit interpreted as final lens unit under 112(b)).
Regarding claim 17, Mizuma discloses in at least example 1 (figs. 1-3B and 19 and table [0086]), an image pickup apparatus (image capturing apparatus fig. 19) comprising:
an optical system (optical system OL fig. 1 in lens apparatus 11 fig. 19); and
an image sensor (image pickup element 12 fig. 19) configured to image an object through (the image capturing apparatus 10 includes a camera main body 13, a lens apparatus 11 including the optical system OL according to any one of the above described first to sixth exemplary embodiments, and an image pickup element 12 which performs photoelectric conversion on an image formed by the optical system OL paragraph [0092]) the optical system (optical system OL fig. 1),
wherein the optical system (optical system OL fig. 1) includes,, in order from an object side to an image side (in order from the object side to the image plane side paragraph [0071]), a first lens unit (first lens unit L1 fig. 1), a second lens unit (second lens unit L2 fig. 1), a third lens unit (third lens unit L3 fig. 1), and a fourth lens unit (fourth lens unit L4 fig. 1),
wherein each distance between adjacent lens units changes during focusing from infinity to a close distance (a distance between adjacent lens units is changed in focusing In focusing from infinity to a closest distance paragraph [0029]),
wherein a total number of lens units disposed in the optical system is five or less (there are five lens groups L1-l5 in the optical system OL fig. 1),
wherein the first lens unit (first lens unit L1 fig. 1) includes four or more positive lenses (first lens unit L1 includes surfaces 1-11 where the lenses with surfaces 1-2 have a focal length of 135.12, surfaces 3-4 have a focal length of 125.67, surfaces 7-8 have a focal length of 50.76 and surfaces 10-11 have a focal length of 57.5 as a result of matrix calculations from table [0086])
wherein, in the first lens unit (first lens unit L1 fig. 1), a lens closest to the object side (surfaces 1-2 is the lens closet to the object side table [0086]) and a lens second closest to the object side (surfaces 3-4 is the lens second closet to the object side table [0086]) are positive lenses (surfaces 1-2 have a focal length of 135.12 and surfaces 3-4 have a focal length of 125.67 as a result of matrix calculations from table [0086]),
wherein the optical system (optical system OL fig. 1) further comprises:
an aperture stop (stop SP fig. 1) disposed on the image side (the stop SP is on the image side of the second lens unit L2 fig. 1) of the second lens unit (second lens unit L2 fig. 1);
a final lens unit (fifth lens unit L5 fig. 1) disposed closest to (the fifth lens unit L5 is closest to the image plane fig. 1) an image plane (image plane IP fig. 1) in the optical system (optical system OL fig. 1), the first lens unit (first lens unit L1 fig. 1) and the final lens unit (fifth lens unit L5 fig. 1) being fixed relative to (the first lens unit L1 and fifth lens L5 unit are fixed during focusing while the second lens unit L2 and fourth lens unit L4 are moved fig. 1) the image plane (image plane IP fig. 1) during the focusing (focusing from infinity to the closest distance paragraph [0072]); and
focus lens units (the second lens unit L2 and the fourth lens unit L4 fig. 1) disposed on the object side (the second lens unit L2 is on the object side of the stop SP fig. 1) and the image side (the fourth lens unit L4 is on the image side of the stop SP fig. 1) of the aperture stop (stop SP fig. 1) and movable during the focusing (the first focus lens unit LF1 (the second lens unit L2) and the second focus lens unit LF2 (the fourth lens unit L4) are moved toward the image plane in focusing from infinity to the closest distance paragraph [0072]),
wherein a focus lens unit (second lens unit L2 fig. 1) closest to the object side (the second lens unit L2 is the closet the object side fig. 1) among the focus lens units (the second lens unit L2 and the fourth lens unit L4 fig. 1) consists of a cemented lens (the second lens unit L2 includes surfaces 12-16 and surfaces 14-16 are a cemented lens table [0086]),
wherein a focus lens unit (the fourth lens unit L4 fig. 1) closest to (the fourth lens unit is closes to the image plane IP fig, 1) the image plane (image plane IP fig. 1) among the focus lens units (the second lens unit L2 and the fourth lens unit L4 fig. 1) moves toward the image side during the focusing (the second focus lens unit LF2 (the fourth lens unit L4) is moved toward the image plane in focusing from infinity to the closest distance paragraph [0072]),
wherein the optical system (optical system OL fig. 1) is configured to increase an absolute value of an imaging magnification at a shortest imaging distance to 0.5 times or higher (a macro lens is expected to have high optical performance for imaging an object in a close distance where an imaging magnification is 0.5 times or more paragraph [0002], β is the lateral magnification of the system paragraph [0047] and lβl >= 0.5 paragraph [0046]),
wherein the final lens unit (fifth lens unit L5 fig. 1) includes a positive lens (the fifth lens unit L5 includes surfaces 26-29 and surfaces 28-29 have a focal length of 53.27 as a result of matrix calculations from table [0086]) and a negative lens (the fifth lens unit L5 includes surfaces 26-29 and surfaces 26-27 have a focal length of -21.41 as a result of matrix calculations from table [0086]), and
wherein the following inequalities are satisfied:
0.025 < dF/L (dF/L = 0.11 as a result of the values below)
0.1 < If4/fl < 0.9 (If4/fl = 0.70 as a result of the values below)
0.0 < If1/fLI < 1.0 (If1/fLI = 0.54 as a result of the values below)
(0.50 < l(1-βis) βr l< 2.00 paragraph [0047])
where dF is a sum of distances on an optical axis from a lens surface closest to an object to a lens surface closest to the image plane in each of the focus lens units (df = d surfaces 12-15 + d surfaces 23-24 = 8.04 + 5.42 = 13.46 table [0086]), L is an overall lens length of the optical system (overall lens length = 123.69 table [0086]), f4 is a focal length of the fourth lens unit (f4 = -56.52 table [0086]), f is a focal length of the optical system (focal length = 80.45 table [0086]), fl is a focal length of the first lens unit (f1 = 46.23 table [0086]), fL is a focal length of the final lens unit (f5 = -85.63 table [0086]), βf is a lateral magnification of the focus lens unit closest to the object side among the focus lens units ("βis" is a lateral magnification of the second partial unit Llb paragraph [0047]), and pr is a combined lateral magnification of all lens units disposed on the image side of the focus lens unit closest to the object side among the focus lens units ("βr" is a composite lateral magnification of all lenses arranged on the image plane side of the second partial unit Llb paragraph [0047]),
Mizuma does not explicitly disclose, wherein the following inequalities are satisfied:
dF/L < 0.099
0.1 < I(1-βf2)xβr2-- I < 5.1I
Where βf is a lateral magnification of the focus lens unit closest to the image plane among the focus lens units, and pr is a combined lateral magnification of all lens units disposed on the image side of the focus lens unit closest to the image plane among the focus lens units.
However It is a well-established proposition that a prima facie case of obviousness exists where
the claimed ranges or amounts do not overlap with the prior art but are merely close. Titanium Metals
Corp. of America v. Banner, 778 F.2d 775, 783, 227 USPQ 773, 779 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (Court held as proper
a rejection of a claim directed to an alloy of "having 0.8% nickel, 0.3% molybdenum, up to 0.1% iron,
balance titanium" as obvious over a reference disclosing alloys of 0.75% nickel, 0.25% molybdenum,
balance titanium and 0.94% nickel, 0.31% molybdenum, balance titanium. "The proportions are so close
that prima facie one skilled in the art would have expected them to have the same properties."). See
M PEP §2144.05.
In the instant case, the prior art teaches a value of dF/L = 0.11 which is so close to the claimed
range of 0.025 < dF/L < 0.099 that prima facie one skilled in the art would have expected them to have
the same properties. Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to choose dF/L such that .025 < dF/L < 0.099 since it has
been held that a prima facie case of obviousness exists where the claimed ranges or amounts do not
overlap with the prior art but are merely close. Titanium Metals Corp. of America v. Banner, 778 F.2d
775, 783, 227 USPQ 773, 779 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (Court held as proper a rejection of a claim directed to an
alloy of "having 0.8% nickel, 0.3% molybdenum, up to 0.1% iron, balance titanium" as obvious over a
reference disclosing alloys of0.75% nickel, 0.25% molybdenum, balance titanium and 0.94% nickel,
0.31% molybdenum, balance titanium. "The proportions are so close that prima facie one skilled in the
art would have expected them to have the same properties."). See MPEP §2144.05.
Additionally Miyagawa discloses in at least example 1 (fig.1, tables 1-3 and 10) , wherein the following inequalities are satisfied:
0.1 < I (1-βf) x βr2 I < 5.1 (l(1-βt52) x βt62l = 4.499 table 10)
Where Bf is a lateral magnification of the focus lens unit closest to the image plane among the focus lens units (βt5 denotes a lateral magnification of the fifth lens group G5 paragraph [0055]), and Br is a combined lateral magnification of all lens units disposed on the image side of the focus lens unit closest to the image plane among the focus lens units (βt6 denotes a lateral magnification of the sixth lens group G6).
Therefore it would be obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have a lateral magnification of the image side focal lens satisfy the equation. Satisfying the conditional expression (3) makes it possible not only to shorten a total length of an optical system, but also to properly correct various aberrations throughout an entire region of object distance (paragraph [0057]).
Regarding claim 18, Mizuma discloses in at least example 1 (figs. 1-3B and 19 and table [0086]), an optical apparatus (lens apparatus fig. 19) comprising an (lens apparatus 11 including the optical system OL according to any one of the above described first to sixth exemplary embodiments paragraph [0092]) optical system (optical system OL fig. 1),
wherein the optical system (optical system OL fig. 1) is attachable to and detachable from (The lens apparatus 11 may be configured to be integrated with or to be detachable from the camera main body 13 paragraph [0092]) an image pickup apparatus (image capturing apparatus fig. 19),
wherein the optical system (optical system OL fig. 1) includes, in order from an object side to an image side (in order from the object side to the image plane side paragraph [0071]), a first lens unit (first lens unit L1 fig. 1), a second lens unit (second lens unit L2 fig. 1), a third lens unit (third lens unit L3 fig. 1), and a fourth lens unit (fourth lens unit L4 fig. 1),
wherein each distance between adjacent lens units changes during focusing from infinity to a close distance (a distance between adjacent lens units is changed in focusing In focusing from infinity to a closest distance paragraph [0029]),
wherein a total number of lens units disposed in the optical system is five or less (there are five lens groups L1-l5 in the optical system OL fig. 1),
wherein the first lens unit (first lens unit L1 fig. 1) includes four or more positive lenses (first lens unit L1 includes surfaces 1-11 where the lenses with surfaces 1-2 have a focal length of 135.12, surfaces 3-4 have a focal length of 125.67, surfaces 7-8 have a focal length of 50.76 and surfaces 10-11 have a focal length of 57.5 as a result of matrix calculations from table [0086])
wherein, in the first lens unit (first lens unit L1 fig. 1), a lens closest to the object side (surfaces 1-2 is the lens closet to the object side table [0086]) and a lens second closest to the object side (surfaces 3-4 is the lens second closet to the object side table [0086]) are positive lenses (surfaces 1-2 have a focal length of 135.12 and surfaces 3-4 have a focal length of 125.67 as a result of matrix calculations from table [0086]),
wherein the optical system (optical system OL fig. 1) further comprises:
an aperture stop (stop SP fig. 1) disposed on the image side (the stop SP is on the image side of the second lens unit L2 fig. 1) of the second lens unit (second lens unit L2 fig. 1);
a final lens unit (fifth lens unit L5 fig. 1) disposed closest to (the fifth lens unit L5 is closest to the image plane fig. 1) an image plane (image plane IP fig. 1) in the optical system (optical system OL fig. 1), the first lens unit (first lens unit L1 fig. 1) and the final lens unit (fifth lens unit L5 fig. 1) being fixed relative to (the first lens unit L1 and fifth lens L5 unit are fixed during focusing while the second lens unit L2 and fourth lens unit L4 are moved fig. 1) the image plane (image plane IP fig. 1) during the focusing (focusing from infinity to the closest distance paragraph [0072]); and
focus lens units (the second lens unit L2 and the fourth lens unit L4 fig. 1) disposed on the object side (the second lens unit L2 is on the object side of the stop SP fig. 1) and the image side (the fourth lens unit L4 is on the image side of the stop SP fig. 1) of the aperture stop (stop SP fig. 1) and movable during the focusing (the first focus lens unit LF1 (the second lens unit L2) and the second focus lens unit LF2 (the fourth lens unit L4) are moved toward the image plane in focusing from infinity to the closest distance paragraph [0072]),
wherein a focus lens unit (second lens unit L2 fig. 1) closest to the object side (the second lens unit L2 is the closet the object side fig. 1) among the focus lens units (the second lens unit L2 and the fourth lens unit L4 fig. 1) consists of a cemented lens (the second lens unit L2 includes surfaces 12-16 and surfaces 14-16 are a cemented lens table [0086]),
wherein a focus lens unit (the fourth lens unit L4 fig. 1) closest to (the fourth lens unit is closes to the image plane IP fig, 1) the image plane (image plane IP fig. 1) among the focus lens units (the second lens unit L2 and the fourth lens unit L4 fig. 1) moves toward the image side during the focusing (the second focus lens unit LF2 (the fourth lens unit L4) is moved toward the image plane in focusing from infinity to the closest distance paragraph [0072]),
wherein the optical system (optical system OL fig. 1) is configured to increase an absolute value of an imaging magnification at a shortest imaging distance to 0.5 times or higher (a macro lens is expected to have high optical performance for imaging an object in a close distance where an imaging magnification is 0.5 times or more paragraph [0002], β is the lateral magnification of the system paragraph [0047] and lβl >= 0.5 paragraph [0046]),
wherein the final lens unit (fifth lens unit L5 fig. 1) includes a positive lens (the fifth lens unit L5 includes surfaces 26-29 and surfaces 28-29 have a focal length of 53.27 as a result of matrix calculations from table [0086]) and a negative lens (the fifth lens unit L5 includes surfaces 26-29 and surfaces 26-27 have a focal length of -21.41 as a result of matrix calculations from table [0086]), and
wherein the following inequalities are satisfied:
0.025 < dF/L (dF/L = 0.11 as a result of the values below)
0.1 < If4/fl < 0.9 (If4/fl = 0.70 as a result of the values below)
0.0 < If1/fLI < 1.0 (If1/fLI = 0.54 as a result of the values below)
(0.50 < l(1-βis) βr l< 2.00 paragraph [0047])
where dF is a sum of distances on an optical axis from a lens surface closest to an object to a lens surface closest to the image plane in each of the focus lens units (df = d surfaces 12-15 + d surfaces 23-24 = 8.04 + 5.42 = 13.46 table [0086]), L is an overall lens length of the optical system (overall lens length = 123.69 table [0086]), f4 is a focal length of the fourth lens unit (f4 = -56.52 table [0086]), f is a focal length of the optical system (focal length = 80.45 table [0086]), fl is a focal length of the first lens unit (f1 = 46.23 table [0086]), fL is a focal length of the final lens unit (f5 = -85.63 table [0086]), βf is a lateral magnification of the focus lens unit closest to the object side among the focus lens units ("βis" is a lateral magnification of the second partial unit Llb paragraph [0047]), and pr is a combined lateral magnification of all lens units disposed on the image side of the focus lens unit closest to the object side among the focus lens units ("βr" is a composite lateral magnification of all lenses arranged on the image plane side of the second partial unit Llb paragraph [0047]).
Mizuma does not explicitly disclose, wherein the following inequalities are satisfied:
dF/L < 0.099
0.1 < I(1-βf2)xβr2-- I < 5.1I
Where βf is a lateral magnification of the focus lens unit closest to the image plane among the focus lens units, and pr is a combined lateral magnification of all lens units disposed on the image side of the focus lens unit closest to the image plane among the focus lens units.
However It is a well-established proposition that a prima facie case of obviousness exists where
the claimed ranges or amounts do not overlap with the prior art but are merely close. Titanium Metals
Corp. of America v. Banner, 778 F.2d 775, 783, 227 USPQ 773, 779 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (Court held as proper
a rejection of a claim directed to an alloy of "having 0.8% nickel, 0.3% molybdenum, up to 0.1% iron,
balance titanium" as obvious over a reference disclosing alloys of 0.75% nickel, 0.25% molybdenum,
balance titanium and 0.94% nickel, 0.31% molybdenum, balance titanium. "The proportions are so close
that prima facie one skilled in the art would have expected them to have the same properties."). See
M PEP §2144.05.
In the instant case, the prior art teaches a value of dF/L = 0.11 which is so close to the claimed
range of 0.025 < dF/L < 0.099 that prima facie one skilled in the art would have expected them to have
the same properties. Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to choose dF/L such that .025 < dF/L < 0.099 since it has
been held that a prima facie case of obviousness exists where the claimed ranges or amounts do not
overlap with the prior art but are merely close. Titanium Metals Corp. of America v. Banner, 778 F.2d
775, 783, 227 USPQ 773, 779 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (Court held as proper a rejection of a claim directed to an
alloy of "having 0.8% nickel, 0.3% molybdenum, up to 0.1% iron, balance titanium" as obvious over a
reference disclosing alloys of0.75% nickel, 0.25% molybdenum, balance titanium and 0.94% nickel,
0.31% molybdenum, balance titanium. "The proportions are so close that prima facie one skilled in the
art would have expected them to have the same properties."). See MPEP §2144.05.
Additionally Miyagawa discloses in at least example 1 (fig.1, tables 1-3 and 10) , wherein the following inequalities are satisfied:
0.1 < I (1-βf) x βr2 I < 5.1 (l(1-βt52) x βt62l = 4.499 table 10)
Where Bf is a lateral magnification of the focus lens unit closest to the image plane among the focus lens units (βt5 denotes a lateral magnification of the fifth lens group G5 paragraph [0055]), and Br is a combined lateral magnification of all lens units disposed on the image side of the focus lens unit closest to the image plane among the focus lens units (βt6 denotes a lateral magnification of the sixth lens group G6).
Therefore it would be obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have a lateral magnification of the image side focal lens satisfy the equation. Satisfying the conditional expression (3) makes it possible not only to shorten a total length of an optical system, but also to properly correct various aberrations throughout an entire region of object distance (paragraph [0057]).
Regarding claim 19, the combination of Mizuma and Miyagawa discloses all the limitations of claim 1 and Mizuma further discloses, wherein the following inequality is satisfied:
0.492 <= lf4/fl (If4/fl = 0.70 as a result of the values above).
Mizuma does not explicitly disclose, wherein the following inequality is satisfied :
lf4/fl <= 0.651
However, It is a well-established proposition that a prima facie case of obviousness exists where the claimed ranges or amounts do not overlap with the prior art but are merely close. Titanium Metals Corp. of America v. Banner, 778 F.2d 775, 783, 227 USPQ 773, 779 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (Court held as proper a rejection of a claim directed to an alloy of "having 0.8% nickel, 0.3% molybdenum, up to 0.1% iron, balance titanium" as obvious over a reference disclosing alloys of 0.75% nickel, 0.25% molybdenum, balance titanium and 0.94% nickel, 0.31% molybdenum, balance titanium. "The proportions are so close that prima facie one skilled in the art would have expected them to have the same properties."). See MPEP §2144.05.
In the instant case, the prior art teaches a value of lf4/fl = 0.70 which is so close to the claimed range of 0.492 <= lf4/fl <= 0.651 that prima facie one skilled in the art would have expected them to have the same properties. Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to choose lf4/fl such that 0.492 <= lf4/fl <= 0.651 since it has been held that a prima facie case of obviousness exists where the claimed ranges or amounts do not overlap with the prior art but are merely close. Titanium Metals Corp. of America v. Banner, 778 F.2d 775, 783, 227 USPQ 773, 779 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (Court held as proper a rejection of a claim directed to an alloy of "having 0.8% nickel, 0.3% molybdenum, up to 0.1% iron, balance titanium" as obvious over a reference disclosing alloys of 0.75% nickel, 0.25% molybdenum, balance titanium and 0.94% nickel, 0.31% molybdenum, balance titanium. "The proportions are so close that prima facie one skilled in the art would have expected them to have the same properties."). See MPEP §2144.05.
Regarding claim 21, the combination of Mizuma and Miyagawa discloses all the limitations of claim 1 and Mizuma further discloses, (0.50 < l(1-βis) βr l< 2.00 paragraph [0047])
where βf is a lateral magnification of the focus lens unit closest to the object side among the focus lens units ("βis" is a lateral magnification of the second partial unit Llb paragraph [0047]), and pr is a combined lateral magnification of all lens units disposed on the image side of the focus lens unit closest to the object side among the focus lens units ("βr" is a composite lateral magnification of all lenses arranged on the image plane side of the second partial unit Llb paragraph [0047]).
Mizuma does not explicitly disclose, wherein the following inequalities are satisfied:
3.200 <= I(1-βf2)xβr2-- I <= 4.001I
However Miyagawa discloses in at least example 1 (fig.1, tables 1-3 and 10) wherein the following inequalities are satisfied:
3.200 <= I (1-βf) x βr2 I (l(1-βt52) x βt62l = 4.499 table 10)
Where Bf is a lateral magnification of the focus lens unit closest to the image plane among the focus lens units (βt5 denotes a lateral magnification of the fifth lens group G5 paragraph [0055]), and Br is a combined lateral magnification of all lens units disposed on the image side of the focus lens unit closest to the image plane among the focus lens units (βt6 denotes a lateral magnification of the sixth lens group G6).
Therefore it would be obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have a lateral magnification of the image side focal lens satisfy the equation. Satisfying the conditional expression (3) makes it possible not only to shorten a total length of an optical system, but also to properly correct various aberrations throughout an entire region of object distance (paragraph [0057]).
Additionally, It is a well-established proposition that a prima facie case of obviousness exists where the claimed ranges or amounts do not overlap with the prior art but are merely close. Titanium Metals Corp. of America v. Banner, 778 F.2d 775, 783, 227 USPQ 773, 779 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (Court held as proper a rejection of a claim directed to an alloy of "having 0.8% nickel, 0.3% molybdenum, up to 0.1% iron, balance titanium" as obvious over a reference disclosing alloys of 0.75% nickel, 0.25% molybdenum, balance titanium and 0.94% nickel, 0.31% molybdenum, balance titanium. "The proportions are so close that prima facie one skilled in the art would have expected them to have the same properties."). See MPEP §2144.05.
In the instant case, the prior art teaches a value of l(1-βt52) x βt62l = 4.499 which is so close to the claimed range of 3.200 <= I(1-βf2)xβr2-- I <= 4.001I that prima facie one skilled in the art would have expected them to have the same properties. Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to choose I(1-βf2)xβr2-- I such that 3.200 <= I(1-βf2)xβr2-- I <= 4.001I since it has been held that a prima facie case of obviousness exists where the claimed ranges or amounts do not overlap with the prior art but are merely close. Titanium Metals Corp. of America v. Banner, 778 F.2d 775, 783, 227 USPQ 773, 779 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (Court held as proper a rejection of a claim directed to an alloy of "having 0.8% nickel, 0.3% molybdenum, up to 0.1% iron, balance titanium" as obvious over a reference disclosing alloys of 0.75% nickel, 0.25% molybdenum, balance titanium and 0.94% nickel, 0.31% molybdenum, balance titanium. "The proportions are so close that prima facie one skilled in the art would have expected them to have the same properties."). See MPEP §2144.05.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mizuma et al. (US 20200341288 A1) in view of Miyagawa et al. (US 20190018229 A1) as applied to claim 1 above and in further view of Gross et al. "Handbook of Optical Systems Volume 3: Aberration Theory and Correction of Optical Systems".
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Mizuma and Miyagawa discloses all the limitations of claim 1 and Mizuma further discloses, wherein the final lens unit (fifth lens unit L5 fig. 1) consists of a positive subunit (surfaces 28-29 have a focal length of 53.26 as a result of matrix calculations of table [0086]) and a negative subunit (surfaces 26-27 have a focal length of -21.41 as a result of matrix calculations of table [0086]).
Mizuma does not disclose in order from the object side to the image side.
However Gross teaches (pages 377) that flipping a lens group into reverse order is amongst
the operations that an ordinary skilled artisan would typically employ in order to find a lens design with
better performance (see suggestion 5). As noted on page 378, Gross teaches that flipping a lens group into reverse order is a zero power operation that keeps the focal power of the lens the same
("zero power operations", "do not introduce any refractive power"). Gross teaches that such zero power
operations can be done without any great perturbation of the existing setup.
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date
of the claimed invention to flip L5 into reverse order to create in order from the object side to the image side a positive subunit of surfaces 28-29 with a focal length of 53.26 and a negative subunit of surfaces 26-27 with a focal length of -21.41, because Gross teaches that flipping the orientation of a cemented doublet is amongst the operations that an ordinary skilled artisan would typically employ in order to find a lens design with better performance (Gross pages 377-378). Furthermore, one of ordinary skill in the art would have a reasonable expectation of success when making this modification because Gross teaches that reversing a cemented doublet does not introduce any refractive power changes and can be done without any great perturbation of the existing setup (Gross page 378, section 33.1.4).
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mizuma et al. (US 20200341288 A1) in view of Miyagawa et al. (US 20190018229 A1) as applied to claim 1 above and in further view of Umeda (US 10379319 B2).
Regarding claim 20, the combination of Mizuma and Miyagawa discloses all the limitations of claim 1.
Mizuma does not disclose, wherein the following inequality is satisfied:
0.109 <= If1/fLI <= 0.195.
However Umeda discloses in at least example 10 (figs. 37-39 and table 10), an optical system (zoom lens according to Example 10 col. 50 lines 59-60) comprising, in order from an object side to an image side (in order from an object along an optical axis col. 12 lines 28-29), a first lens unit (first lens group G1 fig. 37), a second lens unit (second lens group G2 fig. 37), a third lens unit (third lens group G3 fig. 37), and a fourth lens unit (fourth lens group G4 fig. 37)…
wherein the optical system (zoom lens according to Example 10 col. 50 lines 59-60) further comprises:
an aperture stop (stop S fig. 37) disposed on the image side (the stop S is on the image side of the second lens group G2 fig. 37) of the second lens unit (second lens group G2 fig. 37);
a final lens unit (fifth lens group G5 fig. 37) disposed closest to (the fifth lens group G5 is closest to the image plane I fig. 37) an image plane (image plane I fig. 37) in the optical system (zoom lens according to Example 10 col. 50 lines 59-60), the first lens unit (first lens group G1 fig. 37) being fixed relative to (the first lens group G1 is fixed during focusing fig. 37) the image plane (image plane I fig. 37) during the focusing (focusing from an object at infinity to an object at a close distance by moving the fifth lens group G5 toward the object side col. 19 lines 9-11)…
wherein the final lens unit (fifth lens group L5 fig. 1) includes a positive lens (positive meniscus lens L51 fig. 37), and
wherein the following inequalities are satisfied:
0.025 < dF/L < 0.099 (dF/L = 0.03 as a result of the values below)
0.0 < If1/fLI < 1.0 (If1/fLI = 0.16 as a result of the values below)
where dF is a sum of distances on an optical axis from a lens surface closest to an object to a lens surface closest to the image plane in each of the focus lens units (df = d surfaces 29-30 = 4.892 table 10), L is an overall lens length of the optical system (TL W = 162.327 table 10), f1 is a focal length of the first lens unit (f1 = -21.74 table 10), fL is a focal length of the final lens unit (f5 = 135.56 table 10).
Umeda further discloses wherein the following inequality is satisfied:
0.109 <= If1/fLI <= 0.195 (If1/fLI = 0.16 as a result of the values above).
Additionally If1/fLI corresponds to a result-effective variable, i.e., a variable which achieves a recognized result, in the instant case the If1/fLI directly impacts the e.g. focal length of the system. Further, as a result-effective variable, it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges of such things involves only routine skill in the art, In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233 (C.C.P.A. 1955). In the instant case, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the If1/fLI for the purpose of e.g. optimizing the focal length of the system.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Kawamura (US 20190317335 A1) discloses an optical system with five lens units, a focus lens unit and motion blur correction.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW R WRIGHT whose telephone number is (703)756-5822. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 7:30-5 Friday 8-12.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Pinping Sun can be reached at 1-571-270-1284. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of 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.
/ANDREW R WRIGHT/Examiner, Art Unit 2872 /PINPING SUN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Prosecution Insights