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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on 07/05/2026 has been entered.
Response to English Translation of Foreign Priority Document
The English translation of foreign priority document filed on 07/05/2026 has been noticed and entered.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
All the newly amended phase “nano-structure” should be changed back to “nano-microstructure”.
Appropriate correction is required.
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because aa the newly amended phases “nano-structure” should be changed back to “nano-microstructure”. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 07/05/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Regarding the claims 16-21, the applicant argues the rejection under 35 U.S.C 102 is improper over Lai US 2022/0155549 fails to teach or suggest “a nano-structure” in claim 16 because the size of optical mark structures of Lai are on a micrometer scale, not a nanometer scale. The Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Regarding argument, firstly of the newly amended phase “nano-structure” has new matter issue as indicated in 112(a) below, so all the argument is irrelevant.
Secondly, The Examiner interprets “a nano-microstructure” as a structure is between the nanometer scale and the micrometer scale, so that Lai does teach “a nano-microstructure” with the size of optical mark structures in a micrometer scale.
Therefore, the Examiner maintains the rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-38 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.
Amended independent claims 1, 16, and 22 include the newly amended phases “nano-structure” are a new matter issue which are not disclosed in the original disclosure.
Also, dependent claims 2-15, 17-21 and 23-38 are rejected by virtue of their dependency. (The Examiner notes: all new amended phases “nano-structure” should be amended back to “nano-microstructure”, Nanoscale/nanometer scale is 1-100nm, microscale/micrometer scale is 100nm-1µm, so the original phase “nano-microstructure” is corrected even for an average height of the nano-microstructure is between 90nm and 350nm in claim 2, 17 and 26 for example).
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(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.
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Lai US 2022/0155549.
Regarding claim 16, Lai discloses an imaging lens assembly, in at least figs.10-16, having an optical axis (201), and comprising:
a lens barrel (22);
a plurality of optical lens elements (there are four optical lens elements, see fig.12), the optical axis passing through the optical lens elements (see fig.12), and the optical lens elements comprising:
at least one optical lens element (last one in fig.12) disposed in the lens barrel (see fig.12);
an annular retaining element (217) physically contacted with the at least one optical lens element, so that the at least one optical lens element fixed in the lens barrel (See fig.12), and the annular retaining element comprising:
an object-side surface facing an object side of the imaging lens assembly (see fig.12);
an image-side surface facing an image side of the imaging lens assembly (see fig.12), and the image-side surface corresponding to the object-side surface;
an outer diameter surface connected to the object-side surface and the image-side surface (see fig.12); and
a light-through hole formed by gradually tapering from the object-side surface and the image-side surface towards the optical axis (see fig.12), and the optical axis passing through a center of the light-through hole (see fig.12); and
a nano-microstructure (23i includes microstructures in different directions, different heights, different angles, para.68) disposed on one of the object-side surface and the image-side surface (see figs.12 and 13), and the nano-microstructure having a plurality of irregular ridged convexes (para.68); wherein the lens barrel, the nano-microstructure and the at least one optical lens element are simultaneously observed from the imaging lens assembly along a direction parallel to the optical axis (see figs.12 and 13);
wherein the nano-microstructure is located between a lens barrel area (area with 22) defined via the lens barrel and a lens element area (area with the at least one optical lens element) defined via the at least one optical lens element on a direction vertical to the optical axis (see fig.13).
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(s) 17-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lai US 2022/0155549 as applied to claim 16 above, and further in view of Zhang CN 217085377U (see document of 18509388_2026-04-07_CN_217085377_U_M.pdf).
Regarding claims 17-19, Lai does not explicitly disclose an average height of the nano-microstructure is between 195 nm and 255 nm.
Zhang discloses an imaging lens assembly, in at least figs.1-20, an average height of the nano-microstructure is between 195 nm and 255 nm (page 10, 5th paragraph) for the purpose of destructing reflection to reduce the generation of the reflected light (page 10, 5th paragraph).
Accordingly, 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 average height of the nano-microstructure is between 195 nm and 255 nm as taught by Zhang in the imaging lens assembly of Lai for the purpose of destructing reflection to reduce the generation of the reflected light.
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lai US 2022/0155549 as applied to claim 16 above, and further in view of Lai2 US 2017/0176716.
Regarding claim 20, Lai does not explicitly disclose a relative illuminance of the imaging lens assembly is RI, and the following condition is satisfied: 2%<RI<35%.
Lai2 discloses an imaging lens assembly, in figs.1-7, a relative illuminance of the imaging lens assembly is RI, and the following condition is satisfied: 2%<RI<35% (see claim 13, 10%≤RI<100%) for the purpose of improving the imaging quality (abstract).
Accordingly, 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 relative illuminance of the imaging lens assembly is RI, and the following condition is satisfied: 2%<RI<35% as taught by lai2 in the imaging lens assembly of Lai for the purpose of improving the imaging quality.
Claim(s) 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lai US 2022/0155549 as applied to claim 16 above, and further in view of Fan DE 202022103674 U1 (see document of 18509388_2025-12-12_DE_202022103674_U1_M.pdf)
Regarding claim 21, Lai discloses the nano-microstructure formed on a surface of the annular retaining element (see figs.12 and 13).
Lai does not explicitly disclose the annular retaining element further comprising: a connecting structure layer disposed between the nano-microstructure and a surface of the annular retaining element.
Fan discloses an imaging lens assembly, in figs.1-4, the nano-microstructure can be stabilized via the connecting structure layer for the purpose of improving the adhesion stability of the nanostructure (page 11, third paragraph).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the nano-microstructure can be stabilized via the connecting structure layer as taught by Fan in the imaging lens assembly of Lai in order to have the annular retaining element further comprising: a connecting structure layer disposed between the nano-microstructure and a surface of the annular retaining element for the purpose of improving the adhesion stability of the nanostructure.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-15, 22 and 24-38 would be allowable if rewritten or amended in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(a), set forth in this Office action.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Regarding claim 1, the prior art of record, taken alone or in combination, fails to teach or disclose, in light of the specification, the claim limitation of claim 1. For instance, Lai US 2022/0155549, Chang US 2023/0204828, Lai2 US 2017/0176716, Fan DE 202022103674 U1, Zhang CN 217085377U, Tsai US 2023/0324588, Cai CN 218068334U and Li CN 208888461U taken along or in combination, at least fails to disclose or suggest an imaging lens assembly, having an optical axis, and having a lens barrel; a plurality of optical lens elements, the optical axis passing through the optical lens elements, and the optical lens elements comprising: at least one optical lens element disposed in the lens barrel; an annular retaining element physically contacted with the at least one optical lens element, so that the at least one optical lens element fixed in the lens barrel, and the annular retaining element comprising: an object-side surface facing an object side of the imaging lens assembly; an image-side surface facing an image side of the imaging lens assembly, and the image-side surface corresponding to the object-side surface; an outer diameter surface connected to the object-side surface and the image-side surface; and a light-through hole formed by gradually tapering from the object-side surface and the image-side surface towards the optical axis, and the optical axis passing through a center of the light-through hole; a nano-microstructure disposed on at least one of the object-side surface and the image-side surface, and the nano-microstructure having a plurality of irregular ridged convexes; and an optical identification structure disposed on at least one of the image-side surface and the outer diameter surface, the nano-microstructure closer to the optical axis than the optical identification structure to the optical axis, and the optical identification structure comprising at least one first optical identification surface; wherein the lens barrel, the nano-microstructure, the at least one first optical identification surface and the at least one optical lens element are simultaneously observed from the image side towards the object side of the imaging lens assembly and along a direction parallel to the optical axis; wherein the nano-microstructure is located between a lens barrel area defined via the lens barrel and a lens element area defined via the at least one optical lens element on a direction vertical to the optical axis; wherein a relative illuminance of the imaging lens assembly is RI, and the following condition is satisfied: 2%<RI<35%. Claims 2-15 are depended on claim 1 so they are allowable for the same reason.
Regarding claim 22, the prior art of record, taken alone or in combination, fails to teach or disclose, in light of the specification, the claim limitation of claim 22. For instance, Lai US 2022/0155549, Chang US 2023/0204828, Lai2 US 2017/0176716, Fan DE 202022103674 U1, Zhang CN 217085377U, Tsai US 2023/0324588, Cai CN 218068334U and Li CN 208888461U taken along or in combination, at least fails to disclose or suggest the claim limitations of “further comprising: at least one annular retaining element physically contacted with the at least one optical lens element, so that the at least one optical lens element fixed in the at least one lens barrel, and comprising: an object-side surface facing an object side of the imaging lens assembly; an image-side surface facing an image side of the imaging lens assembly, and the image-side surface corresponding to the object-side surface; an outer diameter surface connected to the object-side surface and the image-side surface; and a light-through hole formed by gradually tapering from the object-side surface and the image-side surface towards the optical axis, and the optical axis passing through a center of the light-through hole; an optical identification structure disposed on at least one of the image-side surface and the outer diameter surface, the nano-microstructure closer to the optical axis than the optical identification structure to the optical axis; and a glue material physically contacted with the at least one annular retaining element, so that the at least one annular retaining element fixed in the at least one lens barrel”, along with other claim limitations. Claims 24-38 are depended on claim 22 so they are allowable for the same reason.
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 JIA X PAN whose telephone number is (571)270-7574. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 11:00AM - 5:00PM.
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, Michael H Caley can be reached at (571)272-2286. 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.
/JIA X PAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2871
Prosecution Insights