Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 04, 2026
Application No. 18/606,137

LENS MODULE AND DEVICE HAVING THE LENS MODULE

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Mar 15, 2024
Priority
Dec 27, 2023 — CN 202311821201.3
Examiner
KIM, RICHARD H
Art Unit
2871
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Triple Win Technology(shenzhen) Co.ltd.
OA Round
2 (Non-Final)
82%
Grant Probability
Favorable
2-3
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
87%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 82% — above average
82%
Career Allowance Rate
752 granted / 920 resolved
+13.7% vs TC avg
Moderate +5% lift
Without
With
+5.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 4m
Avg Prosecution
18 currently pending
Career history
933
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.5%
-39.5% vs TC avg
§103
63.7%
+23.7% vs TC avg
§102
26.0%
-14.0% vs TC avg
§112
6.8%
-33.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 920 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 § 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) 1, 5, 8-12, 16 and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Drzymala et al. (US 2022/0221683 A1) in view of Byrne et al. (US 2019/0306966 A1) and Lawrynowicz et al. (US 2008/0241570 A1). Re claims 1 and 11, Drzymala et al. discloses a device comprising: a lens module comprising: a lens assembly comprising a lens (130) and a lens barrel (110) for accommodating the lens; a holder (140, 145, 165) defining a cavity and a groove, wherein at least a portion of the lens assembly (130) is accommodated within the cavity (Fig. 1); a circuit board (115), wherein the holder is arranged on the circuit board; and a sensor (105), wherein the groove on the holder is partially recesses on a surface of the holder (165) facing the circuit board, and the sensor is arranged in the groove (Fig. 1). The holder (165) comprises a groove in which the sensor is arranged in (Fig. 1). Drzymala et al. does not disclose the device wherein a coefficient of thermal expansion of the holder is less than or equal to 0.6 (10-5 cm/cm/oC). Byrne et al. discloses a device wherein a coefficient of thermal expansion of the holder is less than or equal to 0.6 (10-5 cm/cm/oC) (paragraph 0013-0014, paragraph 0016; depicted as “less than about 2 ppm/oC”). Byrne et al. discloses that the entire front of the camera including the lens barrel system may be formed from the low CTE material (paragraph 0016), which would include the holder (14) and the front portion of the housing (26). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to employ the device wherein a coefficient of thermal expansion of the holder is less than or equal to 0.6 (10-5 cm/cm/oC) since one would be motivated by high levels of focus precision in all environments (paragraph 0011). The entire front of the camera of Drzymala et al. may include at least the portion of the front portion (145) of the holder (140, 145, 165). Drzymala et al. as modified by Byrne et al. do not disclose the device wherein the holder is made of titanium alloy, wherein the titanium alloy comprises titanium, aluminum, and vanadium (V), a content of aluminum in the titanium alloy is 6 wt. %, and a content of vanadium in the titanium alloy is 4 wt. %. Lawrynowicz et al. discloses a device wherein a titanium alloy comprising titanium, aluminum, and vanadium (V), a content of aluminum in the titanium alloy is 6 wt. %, and a content of vanadium in the titanium alloy is 4 wt. % (paragraph 0070). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to employ the device wherein the holder is made of titanium alloy, wherein the titanium alloy comprises titanium, aluminum, and vanadium (V), a content of aluminum in the titanium alloy is 6 wt. %, and a content of vanadium in the titanium alloy is 4 wt. % since one would be motivated to employ a well-known material in the art of low thermal expansion. Furthermore, employing Ti6Al4V as a holder material is the simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results (KSR). Re claims 5 and 16, Drzymala et al. does not disclose the device further comprising an adhesive layer arranged in the groove, wherein the adhesive layer fixes the sensor in the groove. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to employ the device further comprising an adhesive layer arranged in the groove, wherein the adhesive layer fixes the sensor in the groove. Drzymala et al. discloses that the sensor is soldered to the printed circuit board (paragraph 0036). It is well known in the art that a conductive adhesive can be used in place of a solder to bond a sensor to a printed circuit board, and the selection of one of these known equivalents would be within the level ordinary skill in the art. Furthermore, it is well known in the art for a conductive adhesive to extend the entire bottom surface of the sensor which would extend into the groove of the holder to improve adhesion. Re claims 8 and 19, Drzymala et al. discloses the device comprising a filter arranged in the cavity and located on an optical path of the lens (paragraph 0039). Re claim 12, Drzymala et al. does not disclose the device wherein the device comprises a vehicle, a mobile phone, a wearable device, or a monitoring device. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to employ the device wherein the device comprises a vehicle, a mobile phone, a wearable device, or a monitoring device since cameras are well known and conventionally used in the art to be employed in a vehicle, a mobile phone, a wearable device, or a monitoring device. Re claims 9, 10 and 20, Drzymala et al. does not disclose the device wherein the lens comprises a first lens portion, a second lens portion, a third lens portion, a fourth lens portion, a fifth lens portion, and a sixth lens portion, which are connected in sequence and coaxial with each other, wherein a diameter of the first lens portion is larger than a diameter of the second lens portion, and diameters of the second lens portion, the third lens portion, the fourth lens portion, and the fifth lens portion gradually decrease in sequence. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to employ the device wherein the lens comprises a first lens portion, a second lens portion, a third lens portion, a fourth lens portion, a fifth lens portion, and a sixth lens portion, which are connected in sequence and coaxial with each other, wherein a diameter of the first lens portion is larger than a diameter of the second lens portion, and diameters of the second lens portion, the third lens portion, the fourth lens portion, and the fifth lens portion gradually decrease in sequence since doing so is well known in the art to manipulate the light beam and compress the light to the sensor. Claim(s) 6-7 and 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Drzymala et al. and Byrne et al., Lawrynowicz et al., in view of Jeong et al. (US 2025/0150702 A1). Re claims 6 and 17, Drzymala et al. discloses the device wherein the circuit board comprises a first rigid portion (115), but does not disclose the device comprising a second rigid board portion, a flexible board portion arranged between the first rigid portion and the second rigid portion, and an electronic component; the circuit board has a first surface facing the holder and a second surface opposite to the first surface, the electronic component is arranged on the first surface of the first rigid board portion, and the holder is arranged on the first surface of the first rigid board portion. Jeong et al. et al. discloses a device comprising a first rigid portion (730), a second rigid portion (770), a flexible portion (750) arranged between the first rigid portion and the second rigid portion, and an electronic component (711); the circuit board has a first surface facing a holder (400) and a second surface opposite to the first surface (Fig. 10), the electronic component is arranged on the first surface of the first rigid board portion (Fig. 10), and the holder (400) is arranged on the first surface of the first rigid board portion (730). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to employ the device comprising a second rigid board portion, a flexible board portion arranged between the first rigid portion and the second rigid portion, and an electronic component; the circuit board has a first surface facing the holder and a second surface opposite to the first surface, the electronic component is arranged on the first surface of the first rigid board portion, and the holder is arranged on the first surface of the first rigid board portion since one would be motivated to connect the printed circuit board to an external device (paragraph 0776). Re claims 7 and 18, Drzymala et al. does not disclose the device wherein the circuit board further comprises an electrical connection portion arranged on the second surface of the second rigid board portion, and the electrical connection portion comprises a connector or gold fingers. Jeong et al. disclose a device wherein the circuit board further comprises an electrical connection portion (773) arranged on the second surface of the second rigid board portion (770). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to employ the device wherein the circuit board further comprises an electrical connection portion arranged on the second surface of the second rigid board portion since one would be motivated to connect the printed circuit board to an external device. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to employ the device wherein the electrical connection portion comprises a connector or gold fingers since doing so is well known in the art to establish a connection with good conductivity. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 4 and 15 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims have been considered but are moot due to new grounds of rejection. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RICHARD H KIM whose telephone number is (571)272-2294. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 10 am-6:30 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, Michael 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. /RICHARD H KIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2871
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 15, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 30, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §103
Apr 28, 2026
Response Filed
Jul 17, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12748285
OPTICAL IMAGING SYSTEM
2y 9m to grant Granted Sep 29, 2026
Patent 12746872
COMMUNICATION LAMP AND CONTROL METHOD OF COMMUNICATION LAMP
3y 0m to grant Granted Sep 29, 2026
Patent 12742913
METHOD OF MANUFACTURING DISPLAY DEVICE AND PROTECTIVE FILM ASSEMBLY
2y 11m to grant Granted Sep 22, 2026
Patent 12730255
OPTICAL ELEMENT
3y 5m to grant Granted Sep 08, 2026
Patent 12724302
DISPLAY ASSEMBLIES INDUCING TURBULENT FLOW
11m to grant Granted Sep 01, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

2-3
Expected OA Rounds
82%
Grant Probability
87%
With Interview (+5.4%)
2y 4m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 920 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month