Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/355,923

LENS MODULE AND CAMERA MODULE INCLUDING THE SAME

Final Rejection §102§103
Filed
Jul 20, 2023
Examiner
HALL, ELIZABETH MARY CAMPBEL
Art Unit
2872
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Samsung Electro-Mechanics Co., Ltd.
OA Round
2 (Final)
73%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 3m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 73% — above average
73%
Career Allow Rate
19 granted / 26 resolved
+5.1% vs TC avg
Strong +30% interview lift
Without
With
+30.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 3m
Avg Prosecution
45 currently pending
Career history
71
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
45.4%
+5.4% vs TC avg
§102
22.1%
-17.9% vs TC avg
§112
30.2%
-9.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 26 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §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 (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. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement(s) filed on 10/09/2025 has been acknowledged and considered by the examiner. Initialed copies of supplied IDS(s) forms are included in this correspondence. Response to Amendment Applicant's arguments with respect to claims 1-19 as they pertain to the prior art have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection, as necessitated by amendment. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 Claims 1, 7, 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Mitani et. al US Patent 5,353,070 (hereinafter “Mitani”). Regarding claim 1, Mitani teaches a lens module, comprising: a lens barrel (Mitani fig. 1 - 1); a plurality of lenses (Mitani fig. 1 - 4a-e) comprising at least one internal lens (Mitani fig. 1 - 4a-d) accommodated inside the lens barrel (1) and an external lens (Mitani fig. 1 - 4e) fixed to a first end of the lens barrel (Mitani fig. 1); and a lens holder (Mitani fig. 1 - 40) comprising: a holder body (40) surrounding the first end of the lens barrel (Mitani fig. 1) and contacting a surface of the first end of the lens barrel facing in a direction of an optical axis of the lens barrel to support the lens barrel (Mitani fig. 1 – the top part of 40 contacts the first end of 1 facing in a direction of an optical axis) and a lens support extending from an inner circumferential surface of the holder body in a direction intersecting the optical axis and contacting an edge of the external lens (see annotated Mitani fig. 1 below, showing the lens support which would intersect the optical axis direction), PNG media_image1.png 415 640 media_image1.png Greyscale wherein the lens support is configured to support an edge of the external lens (Mitani fig. 1 - the above labeled lens support supports an edge of 4e). Regarding claim 7, Mitani teaches an electronic device (Mitani col. 1 lines 8-11) comprising the lens module of claim 1 (see above claim 1 rejection under Mitani). Regarding claim 17, Mitani teaches the lens module of claim 1, and Mitani further teaches wherein the lens support contacts a surface of the edge of the external lens (4e) facing in the direction of the optical axis to support the lens barrel (see the annotated Mitani fig. 1 below). PNG media_image2.png 415 640 media_image2.png Greyscale 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 2-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mitani as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Warashina et. al US 20170104903 (hereinafter “Warashina”) of record. Regarding claim 2, Mitani teaches the lens module of claim 1, and Mitani further teaches wherein the lens barrel (1) is disposed so that light passing through the plurality of lenses is incident on a unit (Mitani fig. 1 - CRT), and the external lens is disposed closer to the unit (CRT) than the at least one internal lens (Mitani fig. 1 – 4e is disposed closer to the CRT than lenses 4a-d). Mitani does not explicitly teach an image sensor unit, however Mitani does teach that the present invention may be mounted in a camera (Mitani col. 1 lines 8-11) which would implicitly include an image sensor in place of the cathode ray tube (CRT). In the same field of endeavor, Warashina teaches wherein the lens barrel is disposed so that light passing through the plurality of lenses is incident on an image sensor unit (Warashina fig. 2 - 132, see also para. 0042 and 0047) for the purpose of converting an amount of incident light imaged on the imagine surface by the lens group in to an electric signal (Warashina para. 0093). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have an image sensor unit as taught by Warashina in the lens module of Mitani in order to convert an amount of incident light imaged on the imagine surface by the lens group in to an electric signal (Warashina para. 0093). Regarding claim 3, Mitani and Warashina teach the lens module of claim 2, and Mitani further teaches wherein the edge of the external lens (Mitani 4e) is bonded to the lens support (Mitani fig. 1 – the internal lip of 40 which supports 4e) to fix the edge of the external lens to the lens support (Mitani col. 2 lines 29-45). Regarding claim 4, Mitani and Warashina teach the lens module of claim 2, and Mitani further teaches wherein the inner circumferential surface that is parallel to the optical axis (Mitani fig. 1 – the inner circumferential surface parallel to the optical axis is shown in the annotated Mitani fig. 1 below; Warashina fig. 2 - 111 and 112 accommodate lenses and allow for light to come through the device, the interior is parallel to the direction of light), and PNG media_image3.png 433 640 media_image3.png Greyscale the lens support (Mitani fig. 1 above; Warashina top part of 134 which contacts 123-4) has a ring shape (Mitani fig. 1 – the lens support surrounds 4e and supports it) and extends perpendicular to the inner circumferential surface of the holder body (Mitani fig. 1 above – the lens support extends perpendicular to the inner circumferential surface). Regarding claim 5, Mitani and Warashina teach the lens module of claim 4, and they further teach wherein the lens holder (Mitani 40) further comprises a barrel support (Mitani fig. 1 – top part of 40 which supports 1) into which the first end of the lens barrel (Mitani fig. 1 – 1; Warashina fig. 2 - 122) is inserted (Warashina fig. 2 – barrel 122 is inserted into holder 111) the barrel support (Mitani top part of 40) is adjacent to the inner circumferential surface of the holder body (see annotated Mitani fig. 1 below) and contacts the surface of the first end of the lens barrel facing in the direction of the optical axis to support the lens barrel (Mitani fig. 1 – 1 contacts 40 facing in the direction of the optical axis to support 1 at a first end, see also the annotated Mitani fig. 1 below). PNG media_image3.png 433 640 media_image3.png Greyscale Regarding claim 6, Mitani and Warashina teach the lens module of claim 5, and they further teaches wherein the lens support (Mitani inner edge of 40 supporting 4e) is disposed closer to the image sensor unit (Warashina 132) than the barrel support (Mitani fig. 1 – inner edge of 40 supporting 4e is disposed closer to the CRT than the top part of 40, which is where 132 would be), and the lens support protrudes closer to the optical axis than the barrel support (Mitani fig. 1 – the inner edge of 40 supporting 4e is closer to the optical axis than the top part of 40). Claims 8-11, 14-16, 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Warashina et. al US 20170104903 (hereinafter “Warashina”) in view of Mitani et. al US Patent 5,353,070 (hereinafter “Mitani”). Regarding claim 8, Warashina teaches a camera module (Warashina para. 0027) comprising: a lens module comprising a lens barrel (Warashina fig. 2 - 122), a plurality of lenses (Warashina fig. 2 - 123-1, 123-2, 123-3, 123-4) fixed to the lens barrel (Warashina fig. 2 - 123-1, 123-2, 123-3 are located inside 122), and a lens holder (Warashina fig. 2 - 111, 112) surrounding a first end of the lens barrel (Warashina fig. 2); and a lens driving device (Warashina fig. 2 - 121) configured to move the lens module (Warashina para. 0045-0046), wherein the plurality of lenses (123-1, 123-2, 123-3, 123-4) comprisees at least one internal lens (123-1, 123-2, 123-3) disposed inside the lens barrel (Warashina fig. 2 - the lenses are inside 122), and an external lens (123-4) fixed to the first end of the lens barrel (Warashina fig. 2), and the lens holder (111, 112) comprises a lens support (Warashina fig. 2 - top part of 134 which contacts 123-4) contacting an edge of the external lens to support the external lens (Warashina fig. 2 - the top of 134 supports the edge of 123-4). Warashina does not teach a lens holder contacting a surface of the first end of the lens barrel facing in a direction of an optical axis of the lens barrel to support the lens barrel. In the same field of endeavor, Mitani teaches contacting a surface of the first end of the lens barrel (1) facing in a direction of an optical axis of the lens barrel (1) to support the lens barrel (Mitani fig. 1 – the top part of 40 contacts the first end of 1 facing in a direction of an optical axis) for the purpose of preventing unnecessary light from entering the inner surface of the lens barrel (Mitani col. 1 lines 49-53). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a first end of the lens barrel contacting a lens holder as taught by Mitani in the camera module of Warashina in order to prevent unnecessary light from entering the inner surface of the lens barrel (Mitani col. 1 lines 49-53). Regarding claim 9, Warashina and Mitani teach the camera module (Warashina para. 0027) of claim 8, and Warashina further teaches further comprising an image sensor unit (Warashina fig. 2 - 132) configured to convert light incident through the plurality of lenses (123-1, 123-2, 123-3, 123-4) into an electrical signal (Warashina para. 0015), wherein the external lens (123-4) is disposed closer to the image sensor unit (132) than the at least one internal lens (Warashina fig. 2 - 123-4 is closer to 132 than any of the other lenses). Regarding claim 10, Warashina and Mitani teach the camera module (Warashina para. 0027) of claim 9, and they further teach wherein the lens holder (Warashina 111, 112) comprises a holder body (Warashina 111, 112) comprising an inner circumferential surface that is parallel to the optical axis (see the annotated Mitani fig. 1 below), PNG media_image3.png 433 640 media_image3.png Greyscale the lens support (Warashina top part of 134 which contacts 123-4) has a ring shape (Warashina para. 0010 – discusses the lens barrel having a diameter, so whatever the lens barrel fits into would need a diameter as well) extending from the inner circumferential surface of the holder body in a direction intersecting the optical axis (see annotated Mitani fig. 1 above), and the edge of the external lens (Warashina 123-4) is bonded to the lens support (Warashina 134) to fix the edge of the external lens to the lens support (Warashina para. 0053-0054). Regarding claim 11, Warashina and Mitani teach the camera module of claim 10, and they further teach wherein the lens holder comprises a barrel support (Warashina fig. 2 – internal part of 111 which contacts 124) into which the first end of the lens barrel (Warashina 122) is inserted (Warashina fig. 2), the barrel support is adjacent to the inner circumferential surface of the holder body and contacts the surface of the first end of the lens barrel facing in the direction of the optical axis to support the lens barrel (see annotated Mitani fig. 1 below, the top part of 40 contacts 1 and supports it), and PNG media_image4.png 509 640 media_image4.png Greyscale the lens support (Warashina top part of 134 which contacts 123-4; Mitani fig. 1 – top part of 40 which contacts and supports 4e) protrudes closer to the optical axis than the barrel support (Warashina fig. 2 - the top part of 134 which contacts 123-4 is closer to the optical axis than the labeled barrel support; Mitani fig. 1 above – the top part of 40 which contacts and supports 4e is closer to the optical axis than the top part of 40 which contacts and supports 1). Regarding claim 14, Warashina and Mitani teach an electronic device (Warashina para. 0027) comprising the camera module of claim 8 (see claim 8 rejection above over Warashina and Mitani). Regarding claim 15, Warashina teaches an electronic device (Warashina para. 0027) comprising: a lens module (Warashina fig. 2 - 100) comprising: a lens barrel (Warashina fig. 2 - 122) comprising a plurality of lenses (Warashina fig. 2 – 123-1, 123-2, 123-3, 123-4); and a lens holder (Warashina fig. 2 – 111, 112) supporting the lens barrel (Warashina fig. 2); wherein the lens holder (111, 112) comprises: a flange (Warashina fig. 2 – the top part of 134 which contacts the edge of 123-4) protruding from an inner circumferential surface of the lens holder (111, 112) in a direction intersecting an optical axis (Warashina fig. 2 - the top part of 134 which contacts 123-4), and the flange (top part of 134 which contacts 123-4) contacts an edge of one of the plurality of lenses (Warashina fig. 2 – supports the edge of 123-4) to support the one of the plurality of lenses, and Warashina does not specify a barrel support contacting a surface of the lens barrel facing in a direction of the optical axis to support the lens barrel, and a width of a flange in the direction intersecting the optical axis is greater than a width of the barrel support in the direction intersecting the optical axis. In the same field of endeavor, Mitani teaches a barrel support contacting a surface of the lens barrel (Mitani fig. 1 - 1) facing in a direction of the optical axis to support the lens barrel (Mitani fig. 1 – the top part of 40 contacts the first end of 1 facing in a direction of an optical axis); a width of the flange in the direction intersecting the optical axis is greater than a width of the barrel support in the direction intersecting the optical axis (see the annotated Mitani fig. 1 below, the labeled flange is wider than the barrel support) for the purpose of preventing unnecessary light from entering the inner surface of the lens barrel (Mitani col. 1 lines 49-53). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a barrel support contacting a surface of the lens barrel facing in a direction of the optical axis to support the lens barrel, and a width of a flange in the direction intersecting the optical axis is greater than a width of the barrel support in the direction intersecting the optical axis as taught by Mitani in the camera module of Warashina in order to prevent unnecessary light from entering the inner surface of the lens barrel (Mitani col. 1 lines 49-53). PNG media_image5.png 483 640 media_image5.png Greyscale Regarding claim 16, Warashina and Mitani teach the electronic device of claim 15, and Warashina further teaches wherein the edge of the one of the plurality of lenses (123-4) is fixed to the flange (top part of 134 which contacts 123-4) by a bonding material (Warashina para. 0054). Regarding claim 18, Warashina and Mitani teach the lens module of claim 8, and Mitani further teaches wherein the lens support contacts a surface of the edge of the external lens (Mitani fig. 1 – 4e) facing in the direction of the optical axis to support the lens barrel (see the annotated Mitani fig. 1 below). PNG media_image2.png 415 640 media_image2.png Greyscale Regarding claim 19, Warashina and Mitani teach the lens module of claim 15, and Mitani further teaches wherein the lens support contacts a surface of the edge of the external lens (Mitani fig. 1 – 4e) facing in the direction of the optical axis to support the lens barrel (see the annotated Mitani fig. 1 below). PNG media_image2.png 415 640 media_image2.png Greyscale Claims 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Warashina and Mitani as applied to claim 8 above, further in view of Rhee et. al US 20200050013 (hereinafter “Rhee”). Regarding claim 12, Warashina and Mitani teach the camera module of claim 8, and Warashina further teaches further comprising: wherein the lens module (Warashina para. 0046 – 122 is mounted in a lens carrier) is disposed in the carrier, wherein the lens driving device (121) comprises: an autofocus (AF) driving unit (Warashina fig. 2 - 121, see also Warashina para. 0045-0046) configured to move the lens module and the carrier relative to the housing in the direction of the optical axis (Warashina para. 0032 – 122 is coupled to the carrier and designed to move for focusing). Warashina does not specifically teach a housing having an inner space; and a carrier disposed in the inner space of the housing, an optical image stabilization (OIS) driving unit configured to drive the lens module within the carrier to move in a first direction or a second direction perpendicular to the optical axis and perpendicular to each other, however Warashina does disclose the lens module (100) and a carrier (Warashina para. 0032). In the same field of endeavor, Rhee teaches a housing (Rhee fig. 2 - 120) having an inner space (Rhee fig. 2); and a carrier (Rhee fig. 2 - 300) disposed in the inner space of the housing (Rhee fig. 2, see also para. 0056), an optical image stabilization (OIS) driving unit (Rhee fig. 2 - 500) configured to move the lens module relative to the carrier (300) either one or both of a first direction perpendicular to the optical axis and a second direction perpendicular to the optical axis and perpendicular to both the first direction and the optical axis (Rhee para. 0059-0061) for the purpose of correcting blurring of an image or a shaking motion of a moving image due to factors such as hand-shake (Rhee para. 0059). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a housing, a carrier within the housing, and an OIS driving unit in order to correct blurring of an image or a shaking motion of a moving image due to factors such as hand-shake (Rhee para. 0059). Regarding claim 13, Warashina and Rhee teach the camera module of claim 12, and Rhee further teaches further comprising: a rolling guide portion (see annotated Rhee fig. 2 below, cropped to show the carrier 300) formed in a surface of the carrier facing the housing and a ball-shaped rolling portion (Rhee fig. 2, see also para. 0056) disposed on the first rolling guide portion to enable the AF driving unit (Rhee fig. 2 - 400) to move the lens module (Rhee fig. 2 - 210) and the carrier (300) relative to the housing in the direction of the optical axis direction (Rhee para. 0072); PNG media_image6.png 259 402 media_image6.png Greyscale a support frame (Rhee fig. 2 - 310) disposed between the carrier (300) and the lens module (Rhee fig. 2 – 310 sits between 210 and 300); a plurality of first guide grooves (Rhee fig. 2 – 301, 302) formed in a surface of the carrier (300) facing the support frame (310) and a first rolling member (Rhee fig. 2 – B2, B4) disposed in the plurality of first guide grooves (Rhee fig. 2) to enable the OIS driving unit to move the lens module relative to the carrier in the second direction (Rhee para. 0070, 0076); and a plurality of second guide grooves (Rhee fig. 2 - 311) formed in a surface of the support frame (310) facing the lens holder (210) and a second rolling member (Rhee fig. 2 - B3) disposed in the plurality of second guide grooves (Rhee fig. 2) to enable the OIS driving unit to move the lens module (210) relative to the carrier (300) in the first direction (Rhee para. 0071-0072). Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any 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 ELIZABETH M HALL whose telephone number is (703)756-5795. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9-5:30 pm PST. 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, Ricky Mack can be reached at (571)272-2333. 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. /ELIZABETH M HALL/Examiner, Art Unit 2872 /RICKY L MACK/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 20, 2023
Application Filed
Aug 15, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Nov 12, 2025
Response Filed
Feb 25, 2026
Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12578620
OPTICAL ELEMENT DRIVING MECHANISM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12504609
OPTICAL SYSTEM AND CAMERA MODULE COMPRISING SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 23, 2025
Patent 12505944
OPTICAL ELEMENT DRIVING MECHANISM
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 23, 2025
Patent 12498549
ZOOM LENS AND IMAGING APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 16, 2025
Patent 12455464
FLOATING IMAGE GENERATION DEVICE AND ELECTRONIC DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Oct 28, 2025
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
73%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+30.4%)
3y 3m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 26 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