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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
Acknowledgement is made of receipt of Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO-1449) filed 01/17/2024. An initialed copy is attached to this Office Action.
Response to Amendment
The amendment to Claim(s) and the Specification (), filed 01/17/2024, are acknowledged and accepted.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 11-28 are objected to because of the following informalities:
The amendment to Claim 1, submitted 01/17/2024, does not provide a clear copy and is very difficult to read. Please refer to MPEP 608.01. The version of the amended claim has areas where, when reproduced, the ink is lighter than the original claim. The reproduced claim contains underlined portions that are difficult to differentiate between what is part of the claim limitation and/or what is actually being amended. Claims are examined as best understood according to the amendment(s) presented.
Claims 11-28, as presented, contain more than one period, have claims not ending in a period and/or have other punctuation issues. Please note: there shall be only one period per claim.
There are multiple limitations contained within parentheses and parenthetical statements are not considered explicitly claimed features of a claim. For examination purposes, limitations contained within parentheses will not be examined or considered.
There are multiple claims that contain bracketed phrases within the claim. Brackets are reserved for correction purposes only (I.e. double brackets indicate removal of that limitation from the claim). For examination purposes, bracketed limitations will not be examined or considered.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 16 and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 16 and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being incomplete for omitting essential elements, such omission amounting to a gap between the elements. See MPEP § 2172.01. The omitted elements are: The equation “CA_O_x < CA_O_x+1 < CA_O x+2 ... < CA_O_6” does not demonstrate how this equation ends. The “…” is not defined in the Specification nor the claim. In addition, the variables are not defined in the claim. Due to the variables not being defined and the equation being indefinite, this claim cannot be examined on its merits.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1, 12-15, 18, 19, 21-23, and 26-28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Zhao et al., (hereafter Zhao) (US 12,055,679 B2).
With respect to Claim 1, Zhao discloses an optical module comprising: a sensor (S15, Figure 6A); and an optical system (Figure 1A) including first to sixth lenses (E1-E6, Figure 6A) sequentially disposed along an optical axis (see annotated Figure 6A) from an object-side (E1 side, Figure 6A) toward a sensor-side (S15 side, Figure 6A), wherein at least one of an object-side surface (E1 side, Figure 6A) and a sensor-side surface (S15 side, Figure 6A) of the sixth lens (E6, Figure 6A) includes a free-form surface (see E6, Figure 6A), wherein the fifth lens (E5, Figure 6A) satisfies 20° ≤ |SA1_O_5| ≤ 60° (column 15, lines 49-51).
PNG
media_image1.png
509
564
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With respect to Claim 12, Zhao further discloses wherein the sixth lens satisfies 10°≤ |SA1_O_x_6| ≤ 40° (column 15, lines 49-51), 10°≤ |SA1_ O _y_6| ≤ 40° (column 15, lines 49-51).
With respect to Claim 13, Zhao further discloses wherein the fifth lens satisfies 0.5 <CT_5/T_O_c_5 < 1.7 (Table 5).
With respect to Claim 14, Zhao further discloses wherein the sixth lens satisfies 0.1 ≤ CT_6/maxT_6 ≤ 1.0 (Table 5).
With respect to Claim 15, Zhao further discloses wherein the fifth lens and the sixth lens satisfy 2 ≤ CD (5/6) / min D_(5/6) ≤ 50 (Table 5).
With respect to Claim 18, Zhao discloses an optical module comprising: a sensor (S15, Figure 6A); and an optical system (Figure 1A) including first to sixth lenses (E1-E6, Figure 6A) sequentially disposed along an optical axis (see annotated Figure 6A) from an object-side (E1 side, Figure 6A) toward a sensor-side (S15 side, Figure 6A), wherein at least one of an object-side surface (E1 side, Figure 6A) and a sensor-side surface (S15 side, Figure 6A) of the sixth lens (E6, Figure 6A) includes a free-form surface (see E6, Figure 6A), the first lens has a positive refractive power (column 15, lines 14-16), the second lens has a negative refractive power (column 15, lines 16-43), the sixth lens has a negative refractive power (column 15, lines 53-55), wherein the sixth lens satisfies 10°≤ SA1_O_x_6| ≤ 40°, 10°≤ SA1_O_y_6| ≤ 40° (column 15, lines 49-51), the optical system includes at least three lenses having an Abbe's number of 50 or less (Table 5), and the optical system includes at least one lens having a refractive index of less than 1.7 (Table 5).
With respect to Claim 19, Zhao further discloses wherein the fifth lens satisfies 20° < |SA1_O_5| ≤ 60° (column 15, lines 49-51).
With respect to Claim 21, Zhao further discloses wherein the fifth lens satisfies 0.5 <CT_5/T_O_c_5 < 1.7 (Table 5).
With respect to Claim 22, Zhao further discloses wherein the sixth lens satisfies 0.1 ≤ CT_6/maxT_6 ≤ 1.0 (Table 5).
With respect to Claim 23, Zhao further discloses wherein the fifth lens and the sixth lens satisfy 2 ≤ CD_(5/6) / min D_(5/6) ≤ 50 (Table 5).
With respect to Claim 26, Zhao discloses an optical module comprising: a sensor (S15, Figure 6A); and an optical system (Figure 1A) including first to sixth lenses (E1-E6, Figure 6A) sequentially disposed along an optical axis (see annotated Figure 6A) from an object-side (E1 side, Figure 6A) toward a sensor-side (S15 side, Figure 6A), wherein at least one of an object-side surface (E1 side, Figure 6A) and a sensor-side surface (S15 side, Figure 6A) of the sixth lens (E6, Figure 6A) includes a free-form surface (see E6, Figure 6A), the first lens has a positive refractive power (column 15, lines 14-16), the second lens has a negative refractive power (column 15, lines 16-43), the sixth lens has a negative refractive power (column 15, lines 53-55), wherein the fifth lens and the sixth lens satisfy 2 ≤ CD_(5/6) / min D_(5/6) ≤ 50 (Table 5).
With respect to Claim 27, Zhao further discloses wherein the fifth lens satisfies 20° < |SA1_O_5| ≤ 60° (column 15, lines 49-51).
With respect to Claim 28, Zhao further discloses wherein the sixth lens satisfies 10°≤ SA1_O_x_6| ≤ 40° (column 15, lines 49-51), 10°≤ SA1_O_y_6| ≤ 40 (column 15, lines 49-51).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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) 11, 17, 20 and 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhao (US 12,055,679 B2) in further view of Lin (US 2019/0094493 A1).
With respect to Claim 11, Zhao teaches the optical module of claim 1, the sixth lens, and 10°≤ |SA1_O_x_6| ≤ 40°, 10°≤ |SA1_ O _y_6| ≤ 40°, wherein the sixth lens satisfies 60° FOV <90° (Table 6), 0.50 < TTL /ImgH 1.0 (Table 6),
Zhao fails to teach wherein the sixth lens satisfies |max Sag_O_x_6| ≠ |max Sag_O_y_6|, and CA_O_x<CA_O_6.
Zhao teaches an optical imaging lens assembly with six lenses and Lin teaches an optical imaging lens with seven lenses.
Lin teaches wherein the sixth lens satisfies |max Sag_O_x_6| ≠ |max Sag_O_y_6| (Figure 66A) and CA_O_x<CA_O_6 (Figure 66A).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective date of the invention to modify the teachings of Zhao having the optical module with the teachings of Lin having the sixth lens satisfy |max Sag_O_x_6| ≠ |max Sag_O_y_6|, and CA_O_x<CA_O_6 for the purpose of improving the longitudinal spherical aberration with respect to different wavelengths, ¶[0136].
With respect to Claim 17, Zhao teaches the optical module of claim 1, and the sixth lens.
Zhao fails to teach wherein the sixth lens satisfies min |Sag_O_x_6| = min |Sag_O_y_6|.
Zhao teaches an optical imaging lens assembly with six lenses and Lin teaches an optical imaging lens with seven lenses.
Lin teaches wherein the sixth lens satisfies min |Sag_O_x_6| = min |Sag_O_y_6| (Figure 66A).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective date of the invention to modify the teachings of Zhao having the optical module with the teachings of Lin having the sixth lens satisfy min |Sag_O_x_6| = min |Sag_O_y_6| for the purpose of improving the longitudinal spherical aberration with respect to different wavelengths, ¶[0136].
With respect to Claim 20, Zhao teaches the optical module of claim 19, the sixth lens, and 10°≤ |SA1_O_x_6| ≤ 40°, 10°≤ |SA1_ O _y_6| ≤ 40°, wherein the sixth lens satisfies 60° FOV <90° (Table 6), 0.50 < TTL /ImgH 1.0 (Table 6),
Zhao fails to teach wherein the sixth lens satisfies |max Sag_O_x_6| ≠ |max Sag_O_y_6|, and CA_O_x<CA_O_6.
Zhao teaches an optical imaging lens assembly with six lenses and Lin teaches an optical imaging lens with seven lenses.
Lin teaches wherein the sixth lens satisfies |max Sag_O_x_6| ≠ |max Sag_O_y_6| (Figure 66A) and CA_O_x<CA_O_6 (Figure 66A).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective date of the invention to modify the teachings of Zhao having the optical module with the teachings of Lin having the sixth lens satisfy |max Sag_O_x_6| ≠ |max Sag_O_y_6|, and CA_O_x<CA_O_6 for the purpose of improving the longitudinal spherical aberration with respect to different wavelengths, ¶[0136].
With respect to Claim 25, Zhao teaches the optical module of claim 1, and the sixth lens.
Zhao fails to teach wherein the sixth lens satisfies min |Sag_O_x_6| = min |Sag_O_y_6|.
Zhao teaches an optical imaging lens assembly with six lenses and Lin teaches an optical imaging lens with seven lenses.
Lin teaches wherein the sixth lens satisfies min |Sag_O_x_6| = min |Sag_O_y_6| (Figure 66A).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective date of the invention to modify the teachings of Zhao having the optical module with the teachings of Lin having the sixth lens satisfy min |Sag_O_x_6| = min |Sag_O_y_6| for the purpose of improving the longitudinal spherical aberration with respect to different wavelengths, ¶[0136].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TAMARA Y WASHINGTON whose telephone number is (571)270-3887. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thur 730-530 EST.
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, Stephone Allen can be reached at 571-272-2434. 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.
/TYW/Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2872
/STEPHONE B ALLEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2872