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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 June 2, 2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on June 2, 2026 has been entered. Claims 1, 10, 15, and 17 have been amended in the present application. Claim 16 is canceled in the present application. Claim 21 is new in the present application. Claims 1-15 and 17-21 are pending in the present application. Applicant’s amendments to the claims have overcome each and every 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed September 30, 2025.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, 10, and 17 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
Claims 1-15 and 17-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
An amendment to the claims or the addition of a new claim must be supported by the description of the invention in the application as filed. In re Wright, 866 F.2d 422, 9 USPQ2d 1649 (Fed. Cir. 1989). With respect to newly added or amended claims, applicant should show support in the original disclosure for the new or amended claims. See, e.g., Hyatt v. Dudas, 492 F.3d 1365, 1370, n.4, 83 USPQ2d 1373, 1376, n.4 (Fed. Cir. 2007); see also MPEP §§ 714.02 and 2163.06.
Independent claims 1, 10, 17, upon which other claims depend, recite the limitations “an F number of more than 2 in a visible spectrum, an effective focal length of more than 2 mm, … and a back focal length of less than 1 mm.”
Applicant has not pointed out where the amended claim is supported, nor does there appear to be a written description of the claim limitation in the application as filed. While Applicant shows support for an optical lens assembly having an F number of 2.2, an effective focal length of 2.18 mm, and a back focal length of 0.88 mm in [0045], there is no evidence for support for the claimed ranges. With respect to changing numerical range limitations, the analysis must take into account which ranges one skilled in the art would consider inherently supported by the discussion in the original disclosure. In the decision in In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976), the ranges described in the original specification included a range of "25%- 60%" and specific examples of "36%" and "50%." A corresponding new claim limitation to "at least 35%" did not meet the description requirement because the phrase "at least" had no upper limit and caused the claim to read literally on embodiments outside the "25% to 60%" range, however a limitation to "between 35% and 60%" did meet the description requirement. See also General Hosp. Corp. v. Sienna Biopharmaceuticals, Inc., 888 F.3d 1368, 1372, 126 USPQ2d 1556, 1560 (Fed. Cir. 2018) (written description support for the claimed concentration is lacking where the specification discloses a range of optical densities and several discrete values in the range with no explicitly defined maximum concentration; and even if the specification may be read to convert each disclosed value into a range, there is insufficient written description for the entire claimed range where the disclosed range minimally overlaps with the claimed range). In the case at hand, Applicant only shows support for single values of F number (2.2), effective focal length (2.18 mm), and back focal length (0.88 mm) in [0045] and does not disclose any other values within the claimed range (i.e. an F number of 3, 5, 10, etc., an effective focal length of 3 mm, 10 mm, 100 mm, etc., or a back focal length of 0.1 mm, 0.3 mm, 0.5 mm, etc.). As such, one of ordinary skill in the art would not recognize that the Applicant had possession of an optical lens system with an F number of more than 2 in a visible spectrum, an effective focal length of more than 2 mm, … and a back focal length of less than 1 mm. Since one of ordinary skill in the art would not recognize that the applicant had possession of the claimed invention, the claims are rejected for failing the written description requirement.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-15 and 17-21 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112 set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claims 1, 10, and 17, the closest prior arts are Wells et al. (U.S. Patent No. 10,895,737 – hereinafter referred to as “Wells”), Ouderkirk et al. (U.S. Patent No. 10,634,824 – hereinafter referred to as “Ouderkirk”), Kim et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0158750 – hereinafter referred to as “Kim”). Wells, Ouderkirk, and Kim teach the previously presented limitations of claims 1, 10, 17 (see Final Rejection dated March 2, 2026). Kim further teaches a optical lens system with a FOV of more than 100 degrees in a diagonal direction (Figure 9 second lens assembly 240, [0179] half field of view of second lens assembly 240 is 60 degrees, FOV = 120 degrees), an F number greater than 2 (Table 1 F-number 2.4), and a back focal length of less than 1 mm (Table 1 0.48 mm). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the tunable lens taught by Ouderkirk and Wells with the second lens assembly taught by Kim in order to provide a single camera with a wide FOV in a mobile device (Kim [0008]-[0009]). Wells, Ouderkirk, and Kim fail to teach or reasonably suggest, alone or in combination, “an effective focal length of more than 2 mm” and “a total track length of 5 mm” in combination with the other limitations of the claims. Moreover, modifying the system to satisfy such a condition would not have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed.
As such, the prior art of record, taken alone or in combination, fails to teach the cumulative details of claim 1, 10, and 17, specifically the limitations: “an effective focal length of more than 2 mm” and “a total track length of 5 mm”
Claims 2-9, 11-15, and 18-21 depend from claims 1, 10, and 17.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEX PARK RICKEL whose telephone number is (703)756-4561. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30 a.m. - 6 p.m. ET.
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, Bumsuk Won can be reached at (571)272-2713. 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.
Alex Rickel
Examiner
Art Unit 2872
/A.P.R./Examiner, Art Unit 2872
/BUMSUK WON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Prosecution Insights