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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 09/03/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pgs. 7-9, filed 09/03/2026, with respect to the rejections of claims 1-4 and 6-24 under 35 U.S.C. § 102 and 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new grounds of rejections are made in view of Zhang et al. (USP No. 10,386,608) and Chen et al. (USP No. 10,268,019).
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 1-4, 6, 8 11, 13 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et al. (USP No. 10,386,608), hereinafter “Zhang”, in view of Lin et al. (USPG Pub No. 2018/0074295), hereinafter “Lin”.
The applied reference has a common assignee with the instant application. Based upon the earlier effectively filed date of the reference, it constitutes prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2).
This rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 might be overcome by: (1) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(a) that the subject matter disclosed in the reference was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor of this application and is thus not prior art in accordance with 35 U.S.C.102(b)(2)(A); (2) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(b) of a prior public disclosure under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(B); or (3) a statement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) establishing that, not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention, the subject matter disclosed and the claimed invention were either owned by the same person or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person or subject to a joint research agreement. See generally MPEP § 717.02.
Regarding claim 1, Zhang discloses an imaging lens assembly (10) comprising six lens elements (see Fig. 14), the six lens elements being, in order from an object side to an image side: a first lens element (3), a second lens element (4), a third lens element (5), a fourth lens element (6), a fifth lens element (7) and a sixth lens element (8) (see Fig. 14); wherein a total number of lens elements of the imaging lens assembly is six (see Figs. 14, 16), the first lens element (3) has positive refractive power, the fourth lens element (6) has negative refractive power, the fifth lens element (7) has an image-side surface being concave in a paraxial region thereof (see Fig. 16); wherein an Abbe number of the fourth lens element is V4, a focal length of the imaging lens assembly is f, a curvature radius of an image-side surface of the sixth lens element is R12, half of a maximum field of view of the imaging lens assembly is HFOV, and the following conditions are satisfied: 10.0 < V4 < 35.0; -0.65 < f/R12 < 4.0; and 5.0 degrees < HFOV < 23.0 degrees (see Fig. 16). Zhang discloses the claimed invention but does not specify and at least one lens element has an Abbe number smaller than 20.0. An Abbe number is contingent upon the material selected for the lens element. The lowest Abbe number of the embodiment presented in Fig. 16 of Zhang is 20.368 for the sixth lens element. In the same field of endeavor, Lin discloses and at least one lens element has an Abbe number smaller than 20.0 (Table 1 – Lenses 2, 3, Paragraph 60). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the imaging lens assembly of Zhang with and at least one lens element has an Abbe number smaller than 20.0 of Lin for the purpose of providing a proper balance between the chromatic aberration correction and astigmatism correction (Paragraph 60). Furthermore, it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416. In addition, 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 (CCPA 1955).
Regarding claim 2, Zhang discloses wherein the first lens element has an object-side surface being convex in a paraxial region thereof (see Figs. 14, 16), the second lens element has an object-side surface being convex in a paraxial region thereof (see Figs. 14, 16). Zhang and Lin teach the imaging lens assembly set forth above for claim 1, Lin further discloses and at least one lens element has an Abbe number equal to or smaller than 19.5 (Table 1, Paragraph 60). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to provide the imaging lens assembly of Zhang with the teachings of Lin for at least the same reasons as those set forth above with respect to claim 1. Furthermore, it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416. In addition, 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 (CCPA 1955).
Regarding claim 4, Zhang further discloses wherein a curvature radius of the image-side surface of the fifth lens element is R10, the curvature radius of the image-side surface of the sixth lens element is R12, and the following condition is satisfied: R10/R12 < 1.8 (see Figs. 14, 16).
Regarding claim 6, Zhang further discloses wherein a central thickness of the first lens element is CT1, an axial distance between the third lens element and the fourth lens element is T34, an axial distance between the fourth lens element and the fifth lens element is T45, a curvature radius of an object-side surface of the first lens element is R1, the curvature radius of the image-side surface of the sixth lens element is R12, and the following conditions are satisfied: 1.8 < (CT1+T34)/T45 < 33.0; and -1.50 < (R1-R12)/(R1+R12) < 2.0 (see Fig. 16).
Regarding claim 8, Zhang further discloses wherein a curvature radius of an object-side surface of the third lens element and a curvature radius of an object-side surface of the fifth lens element have different signs (see Fig. 16); wherein an axial distance between the third lens element and the fourth lens element is T34, an axial distance between the fourth lens element and the fifth lens element is T45, and the following condition is satisfied: 0< T45/T34 < 5.5 (see Fig. 16).
Regarding claim 11, Zhang further discloses wherein an absolute value of a focal length of the sixth lens element is larger than an absolute value of a focal length of the fifth lens element (see Fig. 16).
Regarding claim 13, Zhang discloses an image capturing unit (Col. 1, Lines 21-48), comprising: the imaging lens assembly of claim 1 (see Fig. 14); and an image sensor disposed on an image surface of the imaging lens assembly (Col. 1, Lines 21-48). Zhang and Lin teach the imaging lens assembly set forth above for claim 1, Lin further discloses a driving device disposed on the imaging lens assembly (Paragraph 72). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to provide the imaging lens assembly of Zhang with the teachings of Lin for at least the same reasons as those set forth above with respect to claim 1.
Regarding claim 14, Zhang further discloses an electronic device, comprising: the image capturing unit of claim 13 (Col. 1, Lines 21-48).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang (USP No. 10,386,608) in view of Lin (USPG Pub No. 2018/0074295) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Chen et al. (USP No. 10,268,019), hereinafter “Chen”,
Regarding claim 3, Zhang discloses further comprising an aperture stop disposed between an imaged object and the third lens element (see Figs. 14, 16). Zhang and Lin disclose the claimed invention except for wherein the fourth lens element has an image-side surface being concave in a paraxial region thereof. In the same field of endeavor, Chen discloses wherein the fourth lens element has an image-side surface being concave in a paraxial region thereof (see Fig. 52). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the imaging lens assembly of Zhang and Lin with wherein the fourth lens element has an image-side surface being concave in a paraxial region thereof of Chen for the purpose of providing an imaging lens assembly that can be manufactured more easily, has better imaging quality and has a higher yield rate (Col. 27, Lines 8-13).
Claims 7, 9 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang (USP No. 10,386,608) in view of Lin (USPG Pub No. 2018/0074295) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Yao et al. (USPG Pub No. 2018/0031808), hereinafter “Yao”.
Regarding claim 7, Zhang and Lin disclose the claimed invention except for wherein a central thickness of the first lens element is CT 1, an axial distance between the third lens element and the fourth lens element is T34, an axial distance between the fourth lens element and the fifth lens element is T45, and the following condition is satisfied: 5.8 < (CT1+T34)/T45 < 33.0. In the same field of endeavor, Yao discloses wherein a central thickness of the first lens element is CT 1, an axial distance between the third lens element and the fourth lens element is T34, an axial distance between the fourth lens element and the fifth lens element is T45, and the following condition is satisfied: 5.8 < (CT1+T34)/T45 < 33.0 (Table 1). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the imaging lens assembly of Zhang and Lin with wherein a central thickness of the first lens element is CT 1, an axial distance between the third lens element and the fourth lens element is T34, an axial distance between the fourth lens element and the fifth lens element is T45, and the following condition is satisfied: 5.8 < (CT1+T34)/T45 < 33.0 of Yao for the purpose of providing a lightweight and compact imaging lens assembly capable of capturing high resolution and high quality images (Paragraph 3, Lines 3-6).
Regarding claim 9, Zhang discloses and an absolute value of a curvature radius of an image-side surface of the first lens element is larger than an absolute value of a curvature radius of the image-side surface of the fifth lens element (see Fig. 16). Zhang and Lin disclose the claimed invention except for wherein a focal length of the third lens element has a same sign as a focal length of the fifth lens element. In the same field of endeavor, Yao discloses wherein a focal length of the third lens element has a same sign as a focal length of the fifth lens element (Paragraphs 38, 40). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the imaging lens assembly of Zhang and Lin with wherein a focal length of the third lens element has a same sign as a focal length of the fifth lens element of Yao for the purpose of providing a lightweight and compact imaging lens assembly capable of capturing high resolution and high quality images (Paragraph 3, Lines 3-6).
Regarding claim 10, Zhang and Lin disclose the claimed invention except for wherein a curvature radius of an image-side surface of the third lens element has a same sign as a curvature radius of an object-side surface of the fourth lens element. In the same field of endeavor, Yao discloses wherein a curvature radius of an image-side surface of the third lens element has a same sign as a curvature radius of an object-side surface of the fourth lens element (Table 1). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the imaging lens assembly of Zhang and Lin with wherein a curvature radius of an image-side surface of the third lens element has a same sign as a curvature radius of an object-side surface of the fourth lens element of Yao for the purpose of providing a lightweight and compact imaging lens assembly capable of capturing high resolution and high quality images (Paragraph 3, Lines 3-6).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang (USP No. 10,386,608) in view of Lin (USPG Pub No. 2018/0074295) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Park (USPG Pub No. 2017/0045717).
Regarding claim 12, Zhang and Lin disclose the claimed invention except for wherein the second lens element has positive refractive power, the third lens element has negative refractive power, and the fifth lens element has negative refractive power. In the same field of endeavor, Park discloses wherein the second lens element has positive refractive power, the third lens element has negative refractive power, and the fifth lens element has negative refractive power (see Fig. 7). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the imaging lens assembly of Zhang and Lin with wherein the second lens element has positive refractive power, the third lens element has negative refractive power, and the fifth lens element has negative refractive power of Park for the purpose of providing a miniaturized imaging lens assembly capable of obtaining high resolution, clear images (Paragraphs 5, 6).
Claims 15-21 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen (USP No. 10,268,019) in view of Lin (USPG Pub No. 2018/0074295).
Regarding claim 15, Chen discloses an imaging lens assembly (8) comprising six lens elements (see Figs. 34, 36), the six lens elements being, in order from an object side to an image side: a first lens element (810), a second lens element (820), a third lens element (830), a fourth lens element (840), a fifth lens element (850) and a sixth lens element (860) (see Figs. 34, 36); wherein a total number of lens elements of the imaging lens assembly is six (see Figs. 34, 36), the first lens element (810) has positive refractive power (see Fig. 36), the fourth lens element (840) has negative refractive power (see Fig. 36), the fifth lens element (850) has an image-side surface being concave in a paraxial region thereof (see Fig. 36), a focal length of the third lens element has a same sign as a focal length of the fifth lens element (see Fig. 36); wherein a central thickness of the first lens element is CT1, an axial distance between the third lens element and the fourth lens element is T34, an axial distance between the fourth lens element and the fifth lens element is T45, a maximum value among refractive indices of all lens elements is Nmax, half of a maximum field of view of the imaging lens assembly is HFOV, and the following conditions are satisfied:1.8 < (CT1+T34)/T45 < 33.0; 1.50 < Nmax < 1.75; and 5.0 degrees < HFOV < 23.0 degrees (see Fig. 36). Chen discloses the claimed invention but does not specify and at least one lens element has an Abbe number smaller than 20.0. An Abbe number is contingent upon the material selected for the lens element. The lowest Abbe number of the embodiment presented in Fig. 16 of Zhang is 20.412 for the second lens element. In the same field of endeavor, Lin discloses and at least one lens element has an Abbe number smaller than 20.0 (Table 1 – Lenses 2, 3, Paragraph 60). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the imaging lens assembly of Chen with and at least one lens element has an Abbe number smaller than 20.0 of Lin for the purpose of providing a proper balance between the chromatic aberration correction and astigmatism correction (Paragraph 60). Furthermore, it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416. In addition, 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 (CCPA 1955).
Regarding claim 16, Chen discloses wherein the first lens element has an object-side surface being convex in a paraxial region thereof (see Fig. 36), the second lens element has an object-side surface being convex in a paraxial region thereof (see Fig. 36). Chen and Lin teach the imaging lens assembly set forth above for claim 15, Lin further discloses and at least one lens element has an Abbe number equal to or smaller than 19.5 (Table 1, Paragraph 60). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to provide the imaging lens assembly of Chen with the teachings of Lin for at least the same reasons as those set forth above with respect to claim 15. Furthermore, it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416. In addition, 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 (CCPA 1955).
Regarding claim 17, Chen further discloses wherein the fourth lens element has an image-side surface being concave in a paraxial region thereof (see Fig. 52).
Regarding claim 18, Chen further discloses wherein a curvature radius of the image-side surface of the fifth lens element is R10, a curvature radius of an image-side surface of the sixth lens element is R12, and the following condition is satisfied: -1.8 < R10/R12 < 1.3 (see Fig. 36).
Regarding claim 19, Chen further discloses wherein the axial distance between the fourth lens element and the fifth lens element is T45, a central thickness of the fourth lens element is CT4, a central thickness of the fifth lens element is CT5, and the following condition is satisfied: 0 < T45/(CT4+CT5) < 2.4 (see Fig. 36).
Regarding claim 20, Chen further discloses wherein a curvature radius of an object-side surface of the third lens element has a same sign as a curvature radius of an image-side surface of the third lens element (see Fig. 36); wherein a curvature radius of an object-side surface of the first lens element is R1, a curvature radius of an image-side surface of the sixth lens element is R12, and the following condition is satisfied:-1.70 < (R1-R12)/(R1+R12) < 5.0 (see Fig. 36).
Regarding claim 21, Chen and Lin teach the imaging lens assembly set forth above for claim 15, Lin further discloses wherein a focal length of the imaging lens assembly is f, a curvature radius of an image-side surface of the sixth lens element is R12, and the following condition is satisfied: -0.65 < f/R12 < 4.0 (Table 1).
Regarding claim 23, Chen further discloses wherein an absolute value of a curvature radius of an image-side surface of the sixth lens element is larger than an absolute value of a curvature of an object-side surface of the third lens element (see Fig. 36).
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen (USP No. 10,268,019) in view of Lin (USPG Pub No. 2018/0074295) as applied to claim 15 above, and further in view of Yao (USPG Pub No. 2018/0031808).
Regarding claim 22, Chen and Lin disclose the claimed invention except for wherein a curvature radius of an image-side surface of the third lens element has a same sign as a curvature radius of an object-side surface of the fourth lens element. In the same field of endeavor, Yao discloses wherein a curvature radius of an image-side surface of the third lens element has a same sign as a curvature radius of an object-side surface of the fourth lens element (Table 1). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the imaging lens assembly of Chen and Lin with wherein a curvature radius of an image-side surface of the third lens element has a same sign as a curvature radius of an object-side surface of the fourth lens element of Yao for the purpose of providing a lightweight and compact imaging lens assembly capable of capturing high resolution and high quality images (Paragraph 3, Lines 3-6).
Claim 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen (USP No. 10,268,019) in view of Lin (USPG Pub No. 2018/0074295) as applied to claim 15 above, and further in view of Park (USPG Pub No. 2017/0045717).
Regarding claim 24, Chen and Lin disclose the claimed invention except for wherein the second lens element has positive refractive power, the third lens element has negative refractive power, and the fifth lens element has negative refractive power. In the same field of endeavor, Park discloses wherein the second lens element has positive refractive power, the third lens element has negative refractive power, and the fifth lens element has negative refractive power (see Fig. 7). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the imaging lens assembly of Chen and Lin with wherein the second lens element has positive refractive power, the third lens element has negative refractive power, and the fifth lens element has negative refractive power of Park for the purpose of providing a miniaturized imaging lens assembly capable of obtaining high resolution, clear images (Paragraphs 5, 6).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAHIDERE S SAHLE whose telephone number is (571)270-3329. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 8:00 AM to 5:00 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, Ricky Mack can be reached at 571 272-2333. 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.
/MAHIDERE S SAHLE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872 9/18/2026
Prosecution Insights