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 02/05/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, 7, and 11 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 § 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 1, 2, 4-8, and 10-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsai et al. (2023/0073044, of record) in view of Fujii et al. (2014/0078589).
Regarding claim 1, Tsai discloses a lens (Figure 1, E1, optical lens element), comprising: a lens unit (E1, optical lens element); an anti-reflective (AR) coating layer (C1, anti-reflective coating), disposed on one surface of the lens unit (Figure 1), comprising a first coating layer (Table 15, layer number 3, made of SiO2) and a second coating layer alternately stacked one or more times (Table 15, layer number 5, made of Al2O3), wherein a refractive index of the first coating layer is different from a refractive index of the second coating layer (Table 15 depicts the refractive index of layer number 3 is 1.47, and the refractive index of layer number 5 is gradient); and an intermediate layer, disposed between the lens unit and the AR coating layer (Table 15, layer number 1, made of Al2O3) and is in contact with the first coating layer (layer number 1 is in indirect contact with layer number 3).
Tsai fails to teach wherein the intermediate layer is formed of a same material as the first coating layer. Tsai and Fujii are related because both teach an anti-reflective coating layer.
Fujii teaches an anti-reflective coating layer (at least Figure 1, 20, anti-reflection coating) wherein the intermediate layer (21, intermediate-refractive-index layer) is formed of a same material as the first coating layer ([0075] teaches intermediate-refractive-index layer is made of a mixture of Al2O3 and SiO2, and the low-refractive-index material may include SiO2).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified Tsai to incorporate the teachings of Fujii and provide wherein the intermediate layer is formed of a same material as the first coating layer. Doing so would allow for improved antireflection over a wider wavelength range.
Regarding claim 2, the modified Tsai discloses the lens of claim 1, wherein the first coating layer is formed by depositing SiO.sub.2 using Atomic Layer Deposition (ALD), and the second coating layer is formed by depositing Al.sub.2O.sub.3 using ALD (at least Table 15).
Regarding claim 4, the modified Tsai discloses a lens assembly comprising a plurality of lenses in an optical axis direction (E1-E5, optical lens elements), wherein an outermost lens of the plurality of lenses comprises the lens of claim 1 (Figure 1).
Regarding claim 5, the modified Tsai discloses a portable electronic device comprising a display unit configured to show information from the lens assembly of claim 4 (at least [0085]).
Regarding claim 6, the modified Tsai discloses a lens assembly comprising a plurality of lenses in an optical axis direction (E1-E5, optical lens elements), wherein at least one lens of the plurality of lenses comprises the lens of claim 1 (Figure 1).
Regarding claim 7, Tsai discloses a lens assembly (Figure 1, 1, imaging apparatus) comprising at least one lens (Figure 1, E1, optical lens element), the at least one lens comprising: a lens unit (E1, optical lens element); an anti-reflective (AR) coating layer (C1, anti-reflective coating), disposed on one surface of the lens unit (Figure 1), comprising a first coating layer (Table 15, layer number 3, made of SiO2) and a second coating layer alternately stacked one or more times (Table 15, layer number 5, made of Al2O3), wherein a refractive index of the first coating layer is different from a refractive index of the second coating layer (Table 15 depicts the refractive index of layer number 3 is 1.47, and the refractive index of layer number 5 is gradient); and an intermediate layer, disposed between the lens unit and the AR coating layer (Table 15, layer number 1, made of Al2O3) and is in contact with the first coating layer (layer number 1 is in indirect contact with layer number 3).
Tsai fails to teach wherein the intermediate layer is formed of a same material as the first coating layer. Tsai and Fujii are related because both teach an anti-reflective coating layer.
Fujii teaches an anti-reflective coating layer (at least Figure 1, 20, anti-reflection coating) wherein the intermediate layer (21, intermediate-refractive-index layer) is formed of a same material as the first coating layer ([0075] teaches intermediate-refractive-index layer is made of a mixture of Al2O3 and SiO2, and the low-refractive-index material may include SiO2).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified Tsai to incorporate the teachings of Fujii and provide wherein the intermediate layer is formed of a same material as the first coating layer. Doing so would allow for improved antireflection over a wider wavelength range.
Regarding claim 8, the modified Tsai discloses the lens assembly of claim 7, wherein the first coating layer is formed by depositing SiO.sub.2 using Atomic Layer Deposition (ALD), and the second coating layer is formed by depositing Al.sub.2O.sub.3 using ALD (at least Table 15).
Regarding claim 10, the modified Tsai discloses the lens assembly of claim 7, wherein the at least one lens is disposed on an outermost side of the lens assembly in an optical axis direction of the at least one lens (Figure 1).
Regarding claim 11, Tsai discloses a portable electronic device comprising a display unit configured to show information from a lens assembly (at least [0085]), the lens assembly (Figure 1, 1, imaging apparatus) comprising at least one lens (Figure 1, E1, optical lens element), the at least one lens comprising: a lens unit (E1, optical lens element); an anti-reflective (AR) coating layer (C1, anti-reflective coating), disposed on one surface of the lens unit (Figure 1), comprising a first coating layer (Table 15, layer number 3, made of SiO2) and a second coating layer alternately stacked one or more times (Table 15, layer number 5, made of Al2O3), wherein a refractive index of the first coating layer is different from a refractive index of the second coating layer (Table 15 depicts the refractive index of layer number 3 is 1.47, and the refractive index of layer number 5 is gradient); and an intermediate layer, disposed between the lens unit and the AR coating layer (Table 15, layer number 1, made of Al2O3) and is in contact with the first coating layer (layer number 1 is in indirect contact with layer number 3).
Tsai fails to teach wherein the intermediate layer is formed of a same material as the first coating layer. Tsai and Fujii are related because both teach an anti-reflective coating layer.
Fujii teaches an anti-reflective coating layer (at least Figure 1, 20, anti-reflection coating) wherein the intermediate layer (21, intermediate-refractive-index layer) is formed of a same material as the first coating layer ([0075] teaches intermediate-refractive-index layer is made of a mixture of Al2O3 and SiO2, and the low-refractive-index material may include SiO2).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified Tsai to incorporate the teachings of Fujii and provide wherein the intermediate layer is formed of a same material as the first coating layer. Doing so would allow for improved antireflection over a wider wavelength range.
Regarding claim 12, the modified Tsai discloses the portable electronic device of claim 11, wherein the at least one lens is disposed on an outermost side of the lens assembly in an optical axis direction of the at least one lens (Figure 1).
Regarding claim 13, the modified Tsai discloses the portable electronic device of claim 11, wherein the lens assembly is covered by the display unit (Figures 9A and 9B, 110, imaging apparatus, is covered by 204, user interface).
Claims 2 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsai et al. (2023/0073044, of record) in view of Fujii et al. (2014/0078589), as applied to claims 1 and 7 above, and further in view of Amin et al. (11,267,973, of record).
Regarding claim 2, the modified Tsai discloses the lens of claim 1, but fails to teach wherein the intermediate layer has a thickness of 10 to 20 nm. Tsai and Amin are related because both teach an intermediate layer for an anti-reflective coating layer.
Amin teaches wherein an intermediate layer has a thickness of 10 to 20 nm (at least Table 7 depicts to layer adjacent to the substrate to have a thickness of 10 nm).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have further modified Tsai to incorporate the teachings of Amin and provide wherein the intermediate layer has a thickness of 10 to 20 nm. Doing so would allow for control of the transmittance characteristics while providing strong anti-reflective properties for the layer. Furthermore, it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art (In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233).
Regarding claim 9, the modified Tsai discloses the lens of claim 7, but fails to teach wherein the intermediate layer has a thickness of 10 to 20 nm. Tsai and Amin are related because both teach an intermediate layer for an anti-reflective coating layer.
Amin teaches wherein an intermediate layer has a thickness of 10 to 20 nm (at least Table 7 depicts to layer adjacent to the substrate to have a thickness of 10 nm).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have further modified Tsai to incorporate the teachings of Amin and provide wherein the intermediate layer has a thickness of 10 to 20 nm. Doing so would allow for control of the transmittance characteristics while providing strong anti-reflective properties for the layer. Furthermore, it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art (In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsai et al. (2023/0073044, of record) in view of Fujii et al. (2014/0078589), as applied to claim 11 above, and further in view of Kim et al. (2011/0050989, of record).
Regarding claim 14, the modified Tsai discloses the portable electronic device of claim 11, but fails to teach wherein the lens assembly is covered by tempered glass. Tsai and Kim are related because both teach a portable electronic device.
Kim teaches a portable electronic device wherein the lens assembly is covered by tempered glass (at least Figure 4, 280, protective cover; [0159]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have further modified Tsai to incorporate the teachings of Kim and provide wherein the lens assembly is covered by tempered glass. Doing so would allow for improved durability by protection against external shock or abrupt temperature change.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Makino et al. (2020/0379144) discloses a relevant anti-reflective coating.
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 BALRAM T PARBADIA whose telephone number is (571)270-0602. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 am - 5:00 pm, Monday - Friday.
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.
/BALRAM T PARBADIA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872