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.
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.
Claims 1-20 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Regarding claims 1, 8 and 15, the applicant claims TTL as “a system length of the zoom lens”. However, the applicant does not state in which state the zoom lens is in before determining TTL. In each of the applicant’s embodiments the TTL varies based on the zoom configuration (wide-angle or telephoto). Due to this, it is not clear if satisfaction of the TTL expressions is required in each focal state, either focal state or if any configuration is acceptable (e.g. setting each variable distance to 0).
For the purposes of this action the office the office will interpret the claim such that any configuration of the optical system can be used to measure TTL.
Claims 2, 11 has a similar issue with respect to Gall, where the air gaps vary depending on the lens configuration.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-7, 10-14 and 17-20 would be objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim but for the 112 rejection above. If applicant remedies the 112 rejection these claims would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-2, 8-9 and 15-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu et al. (PGPUB 20170184826) in view of Yamasaki (PGPUB 20140300781).
Regarding claim 1, as best understood, Wu discloses a zoom lens comprising a first lens group, a second lens group and a third lens group in sequence along an optical axis from an object side to an image side (Abst.),
wherein the zoom lens has at least a wide-angle state and a telephoto state (Table 3);
the second lens group has positive refracting power (Abst.);
the zoom lens has only the above three lens groups and satisfies the following relationships:
TTL*(Fnow+ Fnot)/fw≤20.000 (Tables 1, 3 and paragraph [0045] where TTL = 9.973, Fnow = 2.2, Fnot = 4.25 and Fw = 4.3, which gives 15); and
ft/fw≥1.600 ([0045] where ft = 12.91 and gives 3.0);
wherein TTL is a system length of the zoom lens, Fnow is an f-number of the zoom lens in the wide-angle state, Fnot is an f-number of the zoom lens in the telephoto state, fw is an effective focal length of the zoom lens in the wide-angle state, ft is an effective focal length of the zoom lens in the telephoto state, and ImgH is a maximum image height of the zoom lens.
Wu does not disclose a specific image height and therefore does not disclose satisfying (ft+fw)/ImgH≥9.000, but discloses that ft + fw = 17.21 ([0045]).
However, Yamasaki teaches a similar zoom lens system having groups arranged as -, +, - and having an image height of 1.58 ([0088]), which when combined with Wu results in 17.21 / 1.58 > 9.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the invention to combine Wu and Yamasaki such that the image height was approximately 1.58 so the above condition was satisfied motivated by reducing the size of the device.
Regarding claim 2, modified Wu discloses wherein the zoom lens satisfies the following relationships:
(ft+fw+EPDt+EPDw)/(Gall+DG3) ≥1.790 (Tables 1 and 3),
wherein EPDt is an entrance pupil diameter of the zoom lens in the telephoto state, EPDw is an entrance pupil diameter of the zoom lens in the wide-angle state, Gall is a sum of the air gaps of all lens elements of the zoom lens along the optical axis plus back focal length, and DG3 is a length of the third lens group along the optical axis.
Regarding claim 8, as best understood, Wu discloses a zoom lens comprising a first lens group, a second lens group and a third lens group in sequence along an optical axis from an object side to an image side (Abst.),
wherein the zoom lens has at least a wide-angle state and a telephoto state (Table 3);
the third lens group has negative refracting power (Abst.);
the zoom lens has only the above three lens groups and satisfies the following relationships:
TTL*(Fnow+ Fnot)/fw≤20.000 (Tables 1, 3 and paragraph [0045] where TTL = 9.973, Fnow = 2.2, Fnot = 4.25 and Fw = 4.3, which gives 15); and
ft/fw≥1.600 ([0045] where ft = 12.91 and gives 3.0);
wherein TTL is a system length of the zoom lens, Fnow is an f-number of the zoom lens in the wide-angle state, Fnot is an f-number of the zoom lens in the telephoto state, fw is an effective focal length of the zoom lens in the wide-angle state, ft is an effective focal length of the zoom lens in the telephoto state, and ImgH is a maximum image height of the zoom lens.
Wu does not disclose a specific image height and therefore does not disclose satisfying (ft+fw)/ImgH≥9.000, but discloses that ft + fw = 17.21 ([0045]).
However, Yamasaki teaches a similar zoom lens system having groups arranged as -, +, - and having an image height of 1.58 ([0088]), which when combined with Wu results in 17.21 / 1.58 > 9.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the invention to combine Wu and Yamasaki such that the image height was approximately 1.58 so the above condition was satisfied motivated by reducing the size of the device.
Regarding claim 9, modified Wu discloses wherein the zoom lens satisfies the following relationships:
DG3/(DG1+DG2)≤1.500 (Table 1 of Wu where DG3 = 0.3293 and DG1+DG2 = 4.4),
wherein DG1 is a length of the first lens group along the optical axis, DG2 is a length of the second lens group along the optical axis, and DG3 is a length of the third lens group along the optical axis.
Regarding claim 15, as best understood, Wu discloses a zoom lens comprising a first lens group, a second lens group and a third lens group in sequence along an optical axis from an object side to an image side (Abst.),
wherein the zoom lens has at least a wide-angle state and a telephoto state (Table 3);
the third lens group has a lens element closest to the image side, and a periphery region of an image-side surface of the lens element closest to the image side is convex (Tables 1 and 2 where the surface is aspheric);
the zoom lens has only the above three lens groups and satisfies the following relationships:
TTL*(Fnow+ Fnot)/fw≤20.000 (Tables 1, 3 and paragraph [0045] where TTL = 9.973, Fnow = 2.2, Fnot = 4.25 and Fw = 4.3, which gives 15);
wherein TTL is a system length of the zoom lens, Fnow is an f-number of the zoom lens in the wide-angle state, Fnot is an f-number of the zoom lens in the telephoto state, fw is an effective focal length of the zoom lens in the wide-angle state, ft is an effective focal length of the zoom lens in the telephoto state, and ImgH is a maximum image height of the zoom lens.
Wu does not disclose a specific image height and therefore does not disclose satisfying (ft+fw)/ImgH≥9.000, but discloses that ft + fw = 17.21 ([0045]).
However, Yamasaki teaches a similar zoom lens system having groups arranged as -, +, - and having an image height of 1.58 ([0088]), which when combined with Wu results in 17.21 / 1.58 > 9.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the invention to combine Wu and Yamasaki such that the image height was approximately 1.58 so the above condition was satisfied motivated by reducing the size of the device.
Regarding claim 16, modified Wu discloses wherein the zoom lens satisfies the following relationships: (ft+fw)/DG3≥3.800 (Table one of Wu), wherein DG3 is a length of the third lens group along the optical axis.
Examiner Notes
Examiner cites particular columns and line numbers in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested that, in preparing responses, the applicant fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. PGPUB 20120026609 – Kubota – similar 3 group zoom lens that may be combined for a 103 in the rejections of the independent claims.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TRAVIS S FISSEL whose telephone number is (313)446-6573. The examiner can normally be reached on 9AM-5PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Stephone Allen can be reached on (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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/TRAVIS S FISSEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Prosecution Insights