CTNF 18/424,581 CTNF 100147 Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Priority 02-26 AIA Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 01/26/2024 and 12/17/2024 have been considered by the Examiner and made of record in the application file. Election/Restrictions 08-25-01 AIA Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I and Species A1, B1, C1, D1, E1, and F1 in the reply filed on 04/09/2026 is acknowledged. Applicant has kindly indicated that claims 1-28 are generic or directed to the elected species. Claims 29-32 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 04/09/2026. However, upon review the examiner has further identified claim 27 “the image stabilizing unit is included in the front group and is a lens unit closest to the image plane included in the front group” is directed to unelected species D2, drawn to the image stabilizing unit being a lens that is included in the front group and is a lens closest to the image plane included in the front group, and claim 28 “the image stabilizing unit is included in the rear group and is a lens unit closest to the object included in the rear group” is directed to unelected species D3, drawn to the image stabilizing unit being a lens unit that is included in the rear group, and is a lens unit closest to the object included in the rear group. Therefore, claims 27 and 28 are also considered withdrawn. 1 Accordingly, claims 1-26 are examined below. Specification 06-31 AIA The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification. Claim Objections 07-29-01 AIA Claim s 12 and 15 are objected to because of the following informalities: In claim 12, examiner suggests “[[νdG1P]] νdGNP ” In claim 15, examiner suggests “-40 % < Dist_w < 0 % ” Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 1-7, 9-11, 14-15, 17-21, and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harada et al. (US 20200333621 A1) . Regarding independent claim 1, Harada discloses a zoom lens (Example 1; Fig. 1; Table 1) comprising, in order from an object side to an image side: a front group (G1-S; Fig. 1) including a plurality of lens units (G1, G2, G3); an image stabilizing unit (G4; Fig. 1) having negative refractive power (Fig. 1); and a rear group (G5; Fig. 1) including one or more lens units (Fig. 1), wherein each distance between adjacent lens units changes during zooming (Fig. 1), wherein the front group (G1-S) has a focus unit (G2; Fig. 1) and an aperture stop (S; Fig. 1), and wherein the following inequality is satisfied: 43.2° < ωw < 90.0° (ωw = 57.5°; Table 1). Harada does not disclose the following inequality is satisfied: 0.40 < DISw/DSPw < 0.80. However, the position of an aperture stop does not affect the functionality of the device and is only a design choice. It has been held that a mere rearrangement of elements without modification of the operation of the device only involves routine skill in the art. In re Japikse 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have moved the aperture stop such that the inequality 0.40 < DISw/DSPw < 0.80 is satisfied since it has been held that a mere rearrangement of elements without modification of the operation of the device only involves routine skill in the art and the position of an aperture stop does not affect the functionality of the device. Regarding claim 2, Harada discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Harada further discloses the following inequality is satisfied: 0.1 < ΦIS/ΦR < 0.8 (implicit from Fig. 1). Regarding claim 3, Harada discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Harada further discloses the following inequality is satisfied: 25 < νdF < 100 (νdF = 70.4; Table 1). Regarding claim 4, Harada discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Harada further discloses the following inequality is satisfied: 0.20 < DLFw/TLw < 0.70 (Fig. 1; Table 1). Regarding claim 5, Harada discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Harada further discloses the following inequality is satisfied: 0.04 < Skw/TLw < 0.40 (Skw/TLw = 0.18; Table 1). Regarding claim 6, Harada discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Harada further discloses a distance on the optical axis from a lens surface closest to the image plane of a lens unit having negative refractive power included in the front group (G1) to the aperture stop (S) becomes narrower during zooming from the wide-angle end to a telephoto end (Fig. 1). Regarding claim 7, Harada discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Harada further discloses the following inequality is satisfied: -0.45 < fLN/fLF < -0.15 (fLN/fLF = -0.28; Table 1). Regarding claim 9, Harada discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Harada further discloses the following inequality is satisfied: 0.50 < |fLR/fLIS| < 11.00 (|fLR/fLIS| = 0.70; Table 1). Regarding claim 10, Harada discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Harada further discloses the following inequality is satisfied: 1.40 < ndF < 1.91 (ndF = 1.78; Table 1). Regarding claim 11, Harada discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Harada further discloses the following inequality is satisfied: 20 < νdGIS < 80 (νdGIS = 67; Table 1). Regarding claim 14, Harada discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Harada further discloses the following inequality is satisfied: -1.60 < Ymax_w/fLN < -0.40 (Ymax_w/fLN = -0.75; Table 1). Regarding claim 15, Harada discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Harada further discloses the following inequality is satisfied: -40 < Dist_w < 0 (Dist_w ≈ -5%; Fig. 2). Regarding claim 17, Harada discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Harada further discloses the plurality of lens units in the front group (G1-S) include a lens unit having negative refractive power (G1) that includes a plurality of meniscus lenses having convex surfaces toward the object side and arranged in order from the object side (Fig. 1). Regarding claim 18, Harada discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Harada further discloses the plurality of lens units in the front group (G1-S) include a lens unit having negative refractive power (G1) that includes, in order from the object side, four or more negative lenses and at least one positive lens (Fig. 1; Table 1; ¶0055). Regarding claim 19, Harada discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Harada further discloses the plurality of lens units in the front group (G1-S) include a lens unit having negative refractive power (G1) that moves during zooming (Fig. 1). Regarding claim 20, Harada discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Harada does not disclose at the wide-angle end, a distance on the optical axis from a lens surface closest to the image plane of the plurality of lens units included in the front group to the aperture stop is a maximum distance on the optical axis among lens units included in the zoom lens. However, the position of an aperture stop does not affect the functionality of the device and is only a design choice. It has been held that a mere rearrangement of elements without modification of the operation of the device only involves routine skill in the art. In re Japikse 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have moved the aperture stop such a distance on the optical axis from a lens surface closest to the image plane of the plurality of lens units included in the front group to the aperture stop is a maximum distance on the optical axis among lens units included in the zoom lens since it has been held that a mere rearrangement of elements without modification of the operation of the device only involves routine skill in the art and the position of an aperture stop does not affect the functionality of the device. Regarding claim 21, Harada discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Harada further discloses the aperture stop (S) is disposed adjacent to and on the image side of a lens unit having negative refractive power (G1) included in the front group (G1-S) (Fig. 1). Regarding claim 24, Harada discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Harada further discloses a lens unit disposed closest to the image plane (G5) in the rear group (G5) has positive refractive power (Fig. 1; Table 1) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 1-6, 9-16, 19-21, and 24-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kawamura (US 20180275381 A1) . Regarding independent claim 1, Kawamura discloses a zoom lens (Example 2; Fig. 2; ¶0434) comprising, in order from an object side to an image side: a front group (G1-S; Fig. 2) including a plurality of lens units (G1, G2a, G2b; Fig. 2); an image stabilizing unit (G4; Fig. 2) having negative refractive power (Fig. 2; ¶0367, ¶0434); and a rear group (G5; Fig. 2) including one or more lens units (G5; Fig. 2), wherein each distance between adjacent lens units changes during zooming (Fig. 2), wherein the front group (G1-S) has a focus unit (G2b; Fig. 2; ¶0374) and an aperture stop (S; Fig. 2), and wherein the following inequality is satisfied: 0.40 < DISw/DSPw < 0.80 (DISw/DSPw = 0.47; ¶0434). Kawamura does not specifically disclose the conditional expression of 43.2° < ωw < 90.0° is satisfied. Kawamura discloses ωw = 43° (¶0434) that is just outside the claimed range of 43.2° < ωw < 90.0°. It has been held that where the claimed ranges and prior art do not overlap but are close enough that one skilled in the art would have expected them to have the same properties, a prima facie case of obviousness exists, Titanium Metals Corporation of America, 227 USPQ 773 (Fed Cir. 1985). Therefore, since this difference in prior art value and the claimed range is so minimal, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide in the zoom lens system of Kawamura the additional feature of having the ωw value within the claimed range since this range closely approximates the suggested value taught by Kawamura. Regarding claim 2, Kawamura discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Kawamura further discloses the following inequality is satisfied: 0.1 < ΦIS/ΦR < 0.8 (implicit from Fig. 2). Regarding claim 3, Kawamura discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Kawamura further discloses the following inequality is satisfied: 25 < νdF < 100 (νdF = 82; ¶0434). Regarding claim 4, Kawamura discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Kawamura further discloses the following inequality is satisfied: 0.20 < DLFw/TLw < 0.70 (Fig. 2; ¶0434). Regarding claim 5, Kawamura discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Kawamura further discloses the following inequality is satisfied: 0.04 < Skw/TLw < 0.40 (Skw/TLw = 0.12; ¶0434). Regarding claim 6, Kawamura discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Kawamura further discloses a distance on the optical axis from a lens surface closest to the image plane of a lens unit having negative refractive power included in the front group (G2b) to the aperture stop (S) becomes narrower during zooming from the wide-angle end to a telephoto end (Fig. 2). Regarding claim 9, Kawamura discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Kawamura further discloses the following inequality is satisfied: 0.50 < |fLR/fLIS| < 11.00 (|fLR/fLIS| = 1.70; ¶0434). Regarding claim 10, Kawamura discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Kawamura further discloses the following inequality is satisfied: 1.40 < ndF < 1.91 (ndF = 1.50; ¶0434). Regarding claim 11, Kawamura discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Kawamura further discloses the following inequality is satisfied: 20 < νdGIS < 80 (νdGIS = 45.45; ¶0434). Regarding claim 12, Kawamura discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Kawamura further discloses the following inequality is satisfied: 22 < νdGNP < 50 (νdGNP = 25; ¶0434). Regarding claim 13, Kawamura discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Kawamura further discloses the following inequality is satisfied: 0.0 < (R1+R2)/(R1-R2) < 13.0 ((R1+R2)/(R1-R2) = 1.37; ¶0434). Regarding claim 14, Kawamura discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Kawamura does not specifically disclose the conditional expression of -1.60 < Ymax_w/fLN < -0.40 is satisfied. Kawamura discloses Ymax_w/fLN = -0.39 (¶0434) that is just outside the claimed range of -1.60 < Ymax_w/fLN < -0.40. It has been held that where the claimed ranges and prior art do not overlap but are close enough that one skilled in the art would have expected them to have the same properties, a prima facie case of obviousness exists, Titanium Metals Corporation of America, 227 USPQ 773 (Fed Cir. 1985). Therefore, since this difference in prior art value and the claimed range is so minimal, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide in the zoom lens system of Kawamura the additional feature of having the Ymax_w/fLN value within the claimed range since this range closely approximates the suggested value taught by Kawamura. Regarding claim 15, Kawamura discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Kawamura further discloses the following inequality is satisfied: -40 < Dist_w < 0 (Dist_w ≈ -10%; Fig. 10). Regarding claim 16, Kawamura discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Kawamura further discloses a memory storing distortion correction data for correcting distortion (¶0465). Regarding claim 19, Kawamura discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Kawamura further discloses the plurality of lens units in the front group (G1-S) include a lens unit having negative refractive power (G2a) that moves during zooming (Fig. 2). Regarding claim 20, Kawamura discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Kawamura further discloses at the wide-angle end, a distance on the optical axis from a lens surface closest to the image plane of the plurality of lens units included in the front group (last lens surface in G2b) to the aperture stop (S) is a maximum distance on the optical axis among lens units included in the zoom lens (Fig. 2). Regarding claim 21, Kawamura discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Kawamura further discloses the aperture stop (S) is disposed adjacent to and on the image side of a lens unit having negative refractive power (G2b) included in the front group (G1-S) (Fig, 2). Regarding claim 23, Kawamura discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Kawamura further discloses a lens unit disposed closest to the image plane (G5) in the rear group (G5) is fixed relative to the image plane during zooming (Fig. 2). Regarding claim 24, Kawamura discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Kawamura further discloses a lens unit disposed closest to the image plane (G5) in the rear group (G5) has positive refractive power (Fig. 2; ¶0434). Regarding claim 25, Kawamura discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Kawamura further discloses the focus unit (G2b) consists of a single lens (Fig. 2; ¶0434). Regarding claim 26, Kawamura discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Kawamura further discloses the image stabilizing unit (G4) consists of two or less lenses (Fig. 2; ¶0434) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 1-6, 8-15, 19-21, and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamaguchi (US 20180252903 A1) . Regarding independent claim 1, Yamaguchi discloses a zoom lens (Example 1; Fig. 1; Table 1) comprising, in order from an object side to an image side: a front group (G1-G3; Fig. 1) including a plurality of lens units (G1, G2, G3); an image stabilizing unit (G4; Fig. 1) having negative refractive power (Fig. 1); and a rear group (G5; Fig. 1) including one or more lens units (Fig. 1), wherein each distance between adjacent lens units changes during zooming (Fig. 1), wherein the front group (G1-G3) has a focus unit (G2; Fig. 1) and an aperture stop (S; Fig. 1), and wherein the following inequality is satisfied: 43.2° < ωw < 90.0° (ωw = 43.24°; Fig. 2; Table 1). Yamaguchi does not disclose the following inequality is satisfied: 0.40 < DISw/DSPw < 0.80. However, the position of an aperture stop does not affect the functionality of the device and is only a design choice. It has been held that a mere rearrangement of elements without modification of the operation of the device only involves routine skill in the art. In re Japikse 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have moved the aperture stop such that the inequality 0.40 < DISw/DSPw < 0.80 is satisfied since it has been held that a mere rearrangement of elements without modification of the operation of the device only involves routine skill in the art and the position of an aperture stop does not affect the functionality of the device. Regarding claim 2, Yamaguchi discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above, Yamaguchi further discloses the following inequality is satisfied: 0.1 < ΦIS/ΦR < 0.8 (implicit from Fig. 1). Regarding claim 3, Yamaguchi discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above, Yamaguchi further discloses the following inequality is satisfied: 25 < νdF < 100 (νdF = 47; Table 1). Regarding claim 4, Yamaguchi discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Yamaguchi further discloses the following inequality is satisfied: 0.20 < DLFw/TLw < 0.70 (Fig. 1; Table 1). Regarding claim 5, Yamaguchi discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Yamaguchi further discloses the following inequality is satisfied: 0.04 < Skw/TLw < 0.40 (Skw/TLw = 0.29; Table 1). Regarding claim 6, Yamaguchi discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Yamaguchi further discloses a distance on the optical axis from a lens surface closest to the image plane of a lens unit having negative refractive power (G2) included in the front group (G1-G3) to the aperture stop (S) becomes narrower during zooming from the wide-angle end to a telephoto end (Fig. 1). Regarding claim 8, Yamaguchi discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Yamaguchi further discloses the following inequality is satisfied: 0.00 < |fLN/fLR| < 0.40 (|fLN/fLR| = 0.36; Table 1). Regarding claim 9, Yamaguchi discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Yamaguchi further discloses the following inequality is satisfied: 0.50 < |fLR/fLIS| < 11.00 (|fLR/fLIS| = 1.03; Table 1). Regarding claim 10, Yamaguchi discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Yamaguchi further discloses the following inequality is satisfied: 1.40 < ndF < 1.91 (ndF = 1.88; Table 1). Regarding claim 11, Yamaguchi discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Yamaguchi further discloses the following inequality is satisfied: 20 < νdGIS < 80 (νdGIS = 45; Table 1). Regarding claim 12, Yamaguchi discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Yamaguchi further discloses the following inequality is satisfied: 22 < νdGNP < 50 (νdGNP = 46; Table 1). Regarding claim 13, Yamaguchi discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Yamaguchi does not specifically disclose the conditional expression of 0.0 < (R1+R2)/(R1-R2) < 13.0 is satisfied. Yamaguchi discloses (R1+R2)/(R1-R2) = -0.18 (Table 1) that is just outside the claimed range of 0.0 < (R1+R2)/(R1-R2) < 13.0. It has been held that where the claimed ranges and prior art do not overlap but are close enough that one skilled in the art would have expected them to have the same properties, a prima facie case of obviousness exists, Titanium Metals Corporation of America, 227 USPQ 773 (Fed Cir. 1985). Therefore, since this difference in prior art value and the claimed range is so minimal, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide in the zoom lens system of Yamaguchi the additional feature of having the (R1+R2)/(R1-R2) value within the claimed range since this range closely approximates the suggested value taught by Yamaguchi. Regarding claim 14, Yamaguchi discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Yamaguchi further discloses the following inequality is satisfied: -1.60 < Ymax_w/fLN < -0.40 (Ymax_w/fLN = -1.13; Table 1). Regarding claim 15, Yamaguchi discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Yamaguchi further discloses the following inequality is satisfied: -40 < Dist_w < 0 (Dist_w ≈ -5; Fig. 2). Regarding claim 19, Yamaguchi discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Yamaguchi further discloses the plurality of lens units in the front group (G1-G3) include a lens unit having negative refractive power (G2) that moves during zooming (Fig. 1). Regarding claim 20, Yamaguchi discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Yamaguchi does not disclose at the wide-angle end, a distance on the optical axis from a lens surface closest to the image plane of the plurality of lens units included in the front group to the aperture stop is a maximum distance on the optical axis among lens units included in the zoom lens. However, the position of an aperture stop does not affect the functionality of the device and is only a design choice. It has been held that a mere rearrangement of elements without modification of the operation of the device only involves routine skill in the art. In re Japikse 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have moved the aperture stop such a distance on the optical axis from a lens surface closest to the image plane of the plurality of lens units included in the front group to the aperture stop is a maximum distance on the optical axis among lens units included in the zoom lens since it has been held that a mere rearrangement of elements without modification of the operation of the device only involves routine skill in the art and the position of an aperture stop does not affect the functionality of the device. Regarding claim 21, Yamaguchi discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Yamaguchi further discloses the aperture stop (S) is disposed adjacent to and on the image side of a lens unit having negative refractive power (G2) included in the front group (G1-G3) (Fig. 1). Regarding claim 24, Yamaguchi discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Yamaguchi further discloses a lens unit disposed closest to the image plane (G5) in the rear group (G5) has positive refractive power (Fig. 1; Table 1) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 1-6, 8-15, 17, 19-24, and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Umeda (US 20180196223 A1) . Regarding independent claim 1, Umeda discloses a zoom lens (Example 1; Fig. 1; Table 1) comprising, in order from an object side to an image side: a front group (G1-S; Fig. 1) including a plurality of lens units (G1, G2F, G2R); an image stabilizing unit (G3; Fig. 1) having negative refractive power (Table 1); and a rear group (G4-G5; Fig. 1) including one or more lens units (G4, G5; Fig. 1), wherein each distance between adjacent lens units changes during zooming (Fig. 1), wherein the front group (G1-S) has a focus unit (G2F; Fig. 1) and an aperture stop (S; Fig. 1), and wherein the following inequality is satisfied: 43.2° < ωw < 90.0° (ωw = 54.0°; Table 1). Umeda does not disclose the following inequality is satisfied: 0.40 < DISw/DSPw < 0.80. However, the position of an aperture stop does not affect the functionality of the device and is only a design choice. It has been held that a mere rearrangement of elements without modification of the operation of the device only involves routine skill in the art. In re Japikse 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have moved the aperture stop such that the inequality 0.40 < DISw/DSPw < 0.80 is satisfied since it has been held that a mere rearrangement of elements without modification of the operation of the device only involves routine skill in the art and the position of an aperture stop does not affect the functionality of the device. Regarding claim 2, Umeda discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Umeda further discloses the following inequality is satisfied: 0.1 < ΦIS/ΦR < 0.8 (implicit from Fig. 1). Regarding claim 3, Umeda discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Umeda further discloses the following inequality is satisfied: 25 < νdF < 100 (νdF = 59; Table 1). Regarding claim 4, Umeda discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Umeda further discloses the following inequality is satisfied: 0.20 < DLFw/TLw < 0.70 (Fig. 1; Table 1). Regarding claim 5, Umeda discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Umeda further discloses the following inequality is satisfied: 0.04 < Skw/TLw < 0.40 (Skw/TLw = 0.11; Table 1). Regarding claim 6, Umeda discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Umeda further discloses a distance on the optical axis from a lens surface closest to the image plane of a lens unit having negative refractive power (G1) included in the front group (G1-S) to the aperture stop (S) becomes narrower during zooming from the wide-angle end to a telephoto end (Fig. 1). Regarding claim 8, Umeda discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Umeda further discloses the following inequality is satisfied: 0.00 < |fLN/fLR| < 0.40 (|fLN/fLR| = 0.28; Table 1). Regarding claim 9, Umeda discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Umeda further discloses the following inequality is satisfied: 0.50 < |fLR/fLIS| < 11.00 (|fLR/fLIS| = 1.33; Table 1). Regarding claim 10, Umeda discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Umeda further discloses the following inequality is satisfied: 1.40 < ndF < 1.91 (ndF = 1.65; Table 1). Regarding claim 11, Umeda discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Umeda further discloses the following inequality is satisfied: 20 < νdGIS < 80 (νdGIS = 45; Table 1). Regarding claim 12, Umeda discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Umeda further discloses the following inequality is satisfied: 22 < νdGNP < 50 (νdGNP = 29; Table 1). Regarding claim 13, Umeda discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Umeda further discloses the following inequality is satisfied: 0.0 < (R1+R2)/(R1-R2) < 13.0 ((R1+R2)/(R1-R2) = 0.54; Table 1). Regarding claim 14, Umeda discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Umeda further discloses the following inequality is satisfied: -1.60 < Ymax_w/fLN < -0.40 (Ymax_w/fLN = -0.82; Table 1). Regarding claim 15, Umeda discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Umeda further discloses the following inequality is satisfied: -40 < Dist_w < 0 (Dist_w ≈ -5; Fig. 2). Regarding claim 17, Umeda discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Umeda further discloses the plurality of lens units in the front group (G1-S) include a lens unit having negative refractive power (G1) that includes a plurality of meniscus lenses having convex surfaces toward the object side and arranged in order from the object side (Fig. 1). Regarding claim 19, Umeda discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Umeda further discloses the plurality of lens units in the front group include a lens unit having negative refractive power (G1) that moves during zooming (Fig. 1). Regarding claim 20, Umeda discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Umeda does not disclose at the wide-angle end, a distance on the optical axis from a lens surface closest to the image plane of the plurality of lens units included in the front group to the aperture stop is a maximum distance on the optical axis among lens units included in the zoom lens. However, the position of an aperture stop does not affect the functionality of the device and is only a design choice. It has been held that a mere rearrangement of elements without modification of the operation of the device only involves routine skill in the art. In re Japikse 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have moved the aperture stop such a distance on the optical axis from a lens surface closest to the image plane of the plurality of lens units included in the front group to the aperture stop is a maximum distance on the optical axis among lens units included in the zoom lens since it has been held that a mere rearrangement of elements without modification of the operation of the device only involves routine skill in the art and the position of an aperture stop does not affect the functionality of the device. Regarding claim 21, Umeda discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Umeda further discloses the aperture stop is disposed adjacent to and on the image side of a lens unit having negative refractive power (G1) included in the front group (G1-S) (Fig. 1). Regarding claim 22, Umeda discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Umeda further discloses the rear group (G4-G5) includes a plurality of lens units (G4, G5) in which a distance between adjacent lens units changes during zooming (Fig. 1). Regarding claim 23, Umeda discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Umeda further discloses a lens unit disposed closest to the image plane (G5) in the rear group (G4-G5) is fixed relative to the image plane during zooming (Fig. 1). Regarding claim 24, Umeda discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Umeda further discloses a lens unit disposed closest to the image plane (G5) in the rear group (G4-G5) has positive refractive power (Fig. 1; Table 1). Regarding claim 26, Umeda discloses the zoom lens according to claim 1, as set forth above. Umeda further discloses the image stabilizing unit (G3) consists of two or less lenses (Fig. 1; Table 1) . Conclusion 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Shibayama (US 20180196241 A1), Shibayama (US 20180157015 A1), Li (US 20160202457 A1), and Tanaka et al. (US 20120026589 A1) disclose similar zoom lens systems which meet the limitations of independent claim 1 . Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATASHA NIGAM whose telephone number is (571)270-5423. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8-5. 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. /NATASHA NIGAM/Examiner, Art Unit 2872 May 22 nd , 2026 /RICKY L MACK/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2872 Application/Control Number: 18/424,581 Page 2 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 18/424,581 Page 3 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 18/424,581 Page 5 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 18/424,581 Page 6 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 18/424,581 Page 7 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 18/424,581 Page 8 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 18/424,581 Page 9 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 18/424,581 Page 10 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 18/424,581 Page 11 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 18/424,581 Page 12 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 18/424,581 Page 13 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 18/424,581 Page 14 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 18/424,581 Page 15 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 18/424,581 Page 16 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 18/424,581 Page 17 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 18/424,581 Page 18 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 18/424,581 Page 19 Art Unit: 2872 1 Examiner additionally notes independent claim 1 recites “comprising, in order from an object side to an image side: a front group including a plurality of lens units; an image stabilizing unit having negative refractive power; and a rear group including one or more lens units,” indicating the image stabilizing unit is not included in the front group or the rear group and is disposed between the front group and the rear group (directed to elected species D1). The limitations of dependent claims 27 and 28, which recite the image stabilizing unit is included in the front/rear group would broaden the scope and, if examined, would be given a 112(b) rejection.
Prosecution Insights