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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-7, 10-12, 14, 17-18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Chen et al.
The applied reference has a common assignee and inventors with the instant application. Based upon the earlier effectively filed date of the reference, it constitutes prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2). This rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) might be overcome by: (1) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(a) that the subject matter disclosed in the reference was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor of this application and is thus not prior art in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(A); (2) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(b) of a prior public disclosure under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(B) if the same invention is not being claimed; or (3) a statement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) establishing that, not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention, the subject matter disclosed in the reference and the claimed invention were either owned by the same person or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person or subject to a joint research agreement.
Chen et al. (US Pub. 2023/0073671 A1) discloses (see annotated Figure 14):
PNG
media_image1.png
541
807
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, an ultra-short focus projection lens (Figure 1, element 100), configured to receive an image beam (Figure 1, element IB) from an image source side and project the image beam (Figure 1, element IB) toward a projection surface (Figure 1, element IP), wherein the ultra-short focus projection lens (Figure 1, element 100) has an optical axis (element OA), the ultra-short focus projection lens (Figure 14, element 100’) comprises a reflective optical element (Figure 14, element 110), a first lens group (Figure 14, element G2), a stop (Figure 14, element ST), and a second lens group (Figure 14, element G1) arranged in sequence along the optical axis (Figure 14, element OA), after the image beam from the image source side passes through the second lens group (Figure 14, element G1), the stop (Figure 14, element ST), and the first lens group (Figure 14, element G2) in sequence, the image beam is reflected by the reflective optical element (Figure 14, element 110) and projected to the projection surface (page 2, paragraph 0026, lines 13-15); wherein, the first lens group (Figure 14, element G2) comprises a plurality of lenses having diopters (i.e. it is well known in the art that all lenses with a non-flat surface have a diopter, which is a unit of measurement for a lens’ optical power); the second lens group (Figure 14, element G1) comprises a plurality of lenses having diopters (i.e. it is well known in the art that all lenses with a non-flat surface have a diopter, which is a unit of measurement for the lenses optical power); and the first lens group (Figure 14, element G2) and the second lens group (Figure 14, element G1) comprise ten lenses (Figure 14, elements L1-L10) having diopters in total.
Regarding claim 2, a reflective surface (Figure 14, element S24) of the reflective optical element (Figure 14, element 110) is a concave surface (clearly illustrated in Figure 14) facing the first lens group (Figure 14, element G2) and has a negative diopter (i.e. lens with a concave surface), and the concave surface is an aspherical surface (Figure 14, elements S22 and S23).
Regarding claim 3, the first lens group (Figure 14, element G2) and the second lens group (Figure 14, element G1) form a focusing group (Figure 14, element A) configured to be moved along the optical axis (Figure 14, element OA) when the ultra-short focus projection lens is focusing (page 4, paragraph 0039, lines 3-8).
Regarding claim 4, the image beam forms an intermediate image (Figure 14, element CP) between the first lens group (Figure 14, element G2) and the reflective optical element (Figure 14, element 110).
Regarding clam 5, after the image beam is reflected by the reflective optical element (Figure 14, element 110), a focal point (Figure 14, element P2) is formed between the reflective optical element (Figure 14, element 110) and the projection surface (i.e. imaging plane; element IP).
Regarding claim 6, the image source side (Figure 1, element 60) and the projection surface (i.e. imaging plane; element IP) are located at a same side of the ultra-short focus projection lens (Figure 1, element 100).
Regarding claim 7, the ultra-short focus projection lens (Figure 14, element 100’) is a telecentric projection lens (clearly illustrated in Figure 14).
Regarding claim 10, in the plurality of lenses of the first lens group (Figure 14, element G2), a lens (Figure 14, element L10) closest to the reflective optical element (Figure 14, element 110) and a lens (Figure 14, element L6) closest to the stop (Figure 14, element ST) both have negative diopters (i.e. negative refractive power).
Regarding claim 11, the first lens group (Figure 14, element G2) has a negative diopter (page 3, paragraph 0028, line 17).
Regarding claim 12, one of the plurality of lenses of the first lens group (Figure 14, element G2) is an aspheric lens (Figure 14, element L10) with a negative diopter (page 3, paragraph 0028, line 19).
Regarding claim 14, the second lens group (Figure 14, element G1) comprises two double cemented lenses (page 4, paragraph 0046, lines 13-16).
Regarding claim 17, the first lens group (Figure 14, element G2) comprises four lenses (Figure 14, elements L7, L8, L9 and L10) having diopters (i.e. it is well known in the art that all lenses with a non-flat surface have a diopter, which is a unit of measurement for the lenses optical power), and the second lens group (Figure 14, element G1) comprises six lenses (Figure 14, elements L1, L2, L3, L4, L5 and L6) having diopters (i.e. it is well known in the art that all lenses with a non-flat surface have a diopter, which is a unit of measurement for the lenses optical power).
Regarding claim 18, a projection device (Figure 1, element 10), wherein the projection device (Figure 1, element 10) comprises an illumination system (Figure 1, element 50), a light valve (Figure 1, element 60), and an ultra-short focus projection lens (Figure 1, element 100), wherein: the illumination system (Figure 1, element 50) is configured to provide an illumination beam (Figure 1, element I); the light valve (Figure 1, element 60) is disposed on a transmission path of the illumination beam (Figure 1, element I) and configured to convert the illumination beam (Figure 1, element I) into an image beam (Figure 1, element IB); and the ultra-short focus projection lens (Figure 1, element 100) is disposed on a transmission path of the image beam (Figure 1, element IB) and configured to receive the image beam (Figure 1, element IB) from the light valve (Figure 1, element 60) and project the image beam (Figure 1, element PB) toward a projection surface (Figure 1, element IP), the ultra-short focus projection lens (Figure 14, element 100’) has an optical axis (Figure 14, element OA), the ultra-short focus projection lens (Figure 14, element 100’) comprises a reflective optical element (Figure 14, element 110), a first lens group (Figure 14, element G2), a stop (Figure 14, element ST), and a second lens group (Figure 14, element G1) arranged in sequence along the optical axis (Figure 14, element OA), after the image beam from the light valve (Figure 14, element 60) passes through the second lens group (Figure 14, element G1), the stop (Figure 14, element ST), and the first lens group (Figure 14, element G2) in sequence, the image beam (element IB) is reflected by the reflective optical element (Figure 14, element 110) and projected to the projection surface (page 2, paragraph 0026, lines 13-15); wherein, the first lens group (Figure 14, element G2) comprises a plurality of lenses (Figure 14, elements L7, L8, L9 and L10) having diopters (i.e. it is well known in the art that all lenses with a non-flat surface have a diopter, which is a unit of measurement for the lenses optical power); the second lens group (Figure 14, element G1) comprises a plurality of lenses (Figure 14, elements L1, L2, L3, L4, L5 and L6) having diopters (i.e. it is well known in the art that all lenses with a non-flat surface have a diopter, which is a unit of measurement for the lenses optical power); and the first lens group (Figure 14, element G2) and the second lens group (Figure 14, element G1) comprise ten lenses (Figure 14, elements L1-L10) having diopters in total.
Regarding claim 20, the first lens group (Figure 14, element G2) and the second lens group (Figure 14, element G1) form a focusing group (Figure 14, element A) configured to be moved along the optical axis (Figure 14, element OA) when the ultra-short focus projection lens is focusing (page 4, paragraph 0039, lines 3-8).
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.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Chen et al. in view of Sieber et al.
The applied reference has a common assignee and inventors with the instant application. Based upon the earlier effectively filed date of the reference, it constitutes prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2).
Chen et al. (US Pub. 2023/0073671 A1) discloses the ultra-short focus projection lens (Figure 14, element 100’). However, Chen et al. does not teach an ultra-short focus projection lens that complies with: half field of view >70 degrees.
Sieber et al. (US Pub. No. 2015/0190224 A1) teaches an ultra-short focus projection lens (element 14) that complies with: half field of view >70 degrees (page 4, paragraph 0040, lines 1-3).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have an ultra-short focus projection lens that complies with: half field of view >70 degrees as shown by Sieber et al. in combination with Chen et al.’s invention for the purpose of adjusting the refractive power (Sieber et al., page 4, paragraph 0039, line 3).
This rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 might be overcome by: (1) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(a) that the subject matter disclosed in the reference was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor of this application and is thus not prior art in accordance with 35 U.S.C.102(b)(2)(A); (2) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(b) of a prior public disclosure under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(B); or (3) a statement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) establishing that, not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention, the subject matter disclosed and the claimed invention were either owned by the same person or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person or subject to a joint research agreement. See generally MPEP § 717.02.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Chen et al. in view of Bao et al.
The applied reference has a common assignee and inventors with the instant application. Based upon the earlier effectively filed date of the reference, it constitutes prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2).
Chen et al. (US Pub. 2023/0073671 A1) discloses a plurality of lenses (Figure 14, elements L7, L8, L9 and L10) of the first lens group (Figure 14, element G2) comprising an aspherical lens (Figure 14, element L10). However, Chen et al. does not teach at least one piece of plastic aspherical lens.
Bao et al. (US Pub. No. 2021/0318525 A1) discloses at least one piece of plastic aspherical lens (i.e. deformed plastic lens; page 1, paragraph 0007, lines 6-7).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have at least one piece of plastic aspherical lens as shown by Bao et al. in combination with Chen et al.’s invention for the purpose of reducing the volume of the lens (Bao et al., page 1, paragraph 0007, line 4).
This rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 might be overcome by: (1) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(a) that the subject matter disclosed in the reference was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor of this application and is thus not prior art in accordance with 35 U.S.C.102(b)(2)(A); (2) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(b) of a prior public disclosure under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(B); or (3) a statement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) establishing that, not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention, the subject matter disclosed and the claimed invention were either owned by the same person or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person or subject to a joint research agreement. See generally MPEP § 717.02.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Chen et al. in view of Bao et al.
The applied reference has a common assignee and inventors with the instant application. Based upon the earlier effectively filed date of the reference, it constitutes prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2).
Chen et al. (US Pub. 2023/0073671 A1) discloses a plurality of lenses (Figure 14, elements L1, L2, L3, L4, L5 and L6) of the second lens group (Figure 14, element G1), and the plurality of lenses (Figure 14, elements L1, L2, L3, L4, L5 and L6) comprise at least one aspherical lens (Figure 14, element L1). However, Chen et al. does not teach the plurality of lenses are all glass lenses.
Bao et al. (US Pub. No. 2021/0318525 A1) discloses the plurality of lenses are all glass lenses (page 2, paragraph 0015, lines 1-2).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a plurality of lenses are all glass lenses as shown by Bao et al. in combination with Chen et al.’s invention for the purpose of effectively correcting the spherical aberration, reducing the total optical length, and reducing the volume of the lens (see Bao et al., page 3, paragraph 0055, lines 10-13).
This rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 might be overcome by: (1) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(a) that the subject matter disclosed in the reference was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor of this application and is thus not prior art in accordance with 35 U.S.C.102(b)(2)(A); (2) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(b) of a prior public disclosure under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(B); or (3) a statement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) establishing that, not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention, the subject matter disclosed and the claimed invention were either owned by the same person or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person or subject to a joint research agreement. See generally MPEP § 717.02.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Chen et al. in view of Bao et al.
The applied reference has a common assignee and inventors with the instant application. Based upon the earlier effectively filed date of the reference, it constitutes prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2).
Chen et al. (US Pub. 2023/0073671 A1) discloses one of the plurality of lenses (Figure 14, elements L1, L2, L3, L4, L5 and L6) of the second lens group (Figure 14, element G1) is lens (Figure 14, element L1) with a positive diopter (i.e. positive refractive power). However, Chen et al. does not teach a glass aspheric lens.
Bao et al. (US Pub. No. 2021/0318525 A1) discloses a glass aspheric lens (page 3, paragraph 0054, lines 8-9).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a glass aspheric lens as shown by Bao et al. in combination with Chen et al.’s invention for the purpose of effectively correcting the spherical aberration, reducing the total optical length, and reducing the volume of the lens (see Bao et al., page 3, paragraph 0055, lines 10-13).
This rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 might be overcome by: (1) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(a) that the subject matter disclosed in the reference was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor of this application and is thus not prior art in accordance with 35 U.S.C.102(b)(2)(A); (2) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(b) of a prior public disclosure under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(B); or (3) a statement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) establishing that, not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention, the subject matter disclosed and the claimed invention were either owned by the same person or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person or subject to a joint research agreement. See generally MPEP § 717.02.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Chen et al. in view of Huang et al.
The applied reference has a common assignee and inventors with the instant application. Based upon the earlier effectively filed date of the reference, it constitutes prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2).
Chen et al. (US Pub. 2023/0073671 A1) discloses a plurality of lenses (Figure 14, elements L1, L2, L3, L4, L5 and L6) of the second lens group (Figure 14, element G1). However, Chen et al. does not teach a glass lens with a refractive index greater than 1.9.
Huang et al. (CN 104570283 A) discloses a glass lens (see translation, paragraph 0047, lines 2-3) with a refractive index greater than 1.9 (see translation, paragraph 0047, lines 1-2).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a glass lens with a refractive index greater than 1.9 as shown by Huang et al. in combination with Chen et al.’s invention for the purpose of increasing the system’s ability to focus light (Huang et al., see translation, paragraph 0047, line 3).
This rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 might be overcome by: (1) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(a) that the subject matter disclosed in the reference was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor of this application and is thus not prior art in accordance with 35 U.S.C.102(b)(2)(A); (2) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(b) of a prior public disclosure under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(B); or (3) a statement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) establishing that, not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention, the subject matter disclosed and the claimed invention were either owned by the same person or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person or subject to a joint research agreement. See generally MPEP § 717.02.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Chen et al. in view of Yin et al.
The applied reference has a common assignee and inventors with the instant application. Based upon the earlier effectively filed date of the reference, it constitutes prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2).
Chen et al. (US Pub. 2023/0073671 A1) teaches the salient features of the present invention as explained above except a projection device satisfying the equation (h+h’)/h > 125%, wherein h is a length of an image range formed by the image beam projected on the projection surface along a direction perpendicular to the optical axis, and h’ is a distance along a direction perpendicular to the optical axis between a lower edge of the image range formed by the image beam projected on the projection surface and the optical axis.
Yin et al. (WO 2020/187204 A1) discloses (see annotated Figure 1-1) a projection device (Figure 1-1, element 20) satisfying the equation (h+h’)/h > 125%, wherein h (Figure 1-1, element h) is a length of an image range formed by the image beam (Figure 1-1, element C) projected on the projection surface (Figure 1-1, element 10) along a direction perpendicular to the optical axis (Figure 1-1, element B), and h’ (Figure 1-1, element A) is a distance along a direction perpendicular to the optical axis (Figure 1-1, element B) between a lower edge (Figure 1-1, element D) of the image range formed by the image beam (Figure 1-1, element C) projected on the projection surface (Figure 1-1, element 10) and the optical axis (Figure 1-1, element B).
PNG
media_image2.png
742
558
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a projection device satisfying the equation (h+h’)/h > 125% as shown by Yin et al. in combination with Chen et al.’s invention for the purpose of projecting a large image at a very short projection distance, and wherein the projection device and the screen are likely to be integrated into one device (Yin et al., see translation, paragraph 0033, lines 8-10).
This rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 might be overcome by: (1) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(a) that the subject matter disclosed in the reference was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor of this application and is thus not prior art in accordance with 35 U.S.C.102(b)(2)(A); (2) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(b) of a prior public disclosure under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(B); or (3) a statement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) establishing that, not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention, the subject matter disclosed and the claimed invention were either owned by the same person or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person or subject to a joint research agreement. See generally MPEP § 717.02.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed on 02/05/2026 have been considered but are moot in view of new grounds of rejection. Applicant's amendment necessitated the new grounds of rejection presented in this Office action.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAGDA CRUZ whose telephone number is (571)272-2114. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday from 9:00 AM to 5:30 PM.
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, Toan Ton can be reached at 571-272-2303. 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.
/MAGDA CRUZ/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2882
04/27/2026
Prosecution Insights