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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
As required by M.P.E.P. 609, the applicant’s submissions of the Information Disclosure Statement dated 4/01/2024 is acknowledged by the examiner and the cited references have been considered in the examination of the claims now pending.
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it uses legalese - i.e. it is an almost verbatim copy of claim 1. Correction is required. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words. The form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as "means" and "said," should be avoided. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, "The disclosure concerns," "The disclosure defined by this invention," "The disclosure describes," etc.
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
The title of the invention, “LENS UNIT”, is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claims 3, 4, and 6 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.
With respect to Claims 3 and 4, the term “predetermined position” in claim 3 and claim 4 is a relative term which render the claims indefinite. The term “predetermined position” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Thus, the location of the disclosed lens, difference in position with regard to the image side of the lens unit, and placement of everything within the optical axis in the claims has been rendered indefinite by the use of these terms.
Dependent claim 6 inherits its deficiency from dependent claim 3.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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, 2, and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nakajima (20250208369).
Regarding claim 1, Nakajima discloses (see at least Fig 2, Fig 3) a lens unit (lens unit 1) comprising: a first lens (2) and a second lens (5) disposed in order from an object side to an image side (Fig 2, [0031], object side X2, image side X1); a first lens barrel (3) comprising an annular accommodating portion which accommodates an outer peripheral-edge portion of the first lens (Fig 2, [0039], first lens barrel member 21 includes a first cylindrical portion 25 located on the outer peripheral side of the first lens 2); a second lens barrel (Fig 3, [0037], second lens barrel member 22) which accommodates a second lens (5) and is held on an inner peripheral side of the first lens barrel (Fig 2, [0030], lens unit 1 includes a lens group 4 held by the lens barrel 3; lens group 4 includes a second lens 5); and a first O-ring (Fig 1, [0040], elastic member 33 is an O-ring), wherein the first lens (2) has an end surface facing the image side on an outer peripheral side of a lens surface (Fig 2, [0030], lens unit 1 includes a lens group 4 held by the lens barrel 3 on an image side X1 of the first lens 2 in an optical axis direction X along an optical axis L of the first lens); the accommodating portion comprises a peripheral wall surface located on an outer peripheral side of the second lens barrel and facing the first lens from an outer side in a radial direction (Fig 2, Fig 3, [0037], second lens barrel member 22 is accommodated on the inner peripheral side of the first lens barrel member 21), a support surface (support surface 31a) extending from an end on the image side of the peripheral wall surface to an inner peripheral side and facing the end surface from the image side (Fig 3, [0050], flange surface 2b abuts the support surface 31a of the first lens support portion 31 of the annular protrusion 26), and a caulking portion (Fig 3, first abutting portion 29) which is brought into contact with the first lens from the object side at a position overlapping the support surface when viewed from an optical axis direction along an optical axis of the first lens (Fig 3, [0050], end of the first lens barrel member 21 on the object side X2 is caulked to form the first abutting portion 29); the second lens (5) comprises an annular contact portion (5a) which is in surface contact with the end surface of the first lens on an inner peripheral side of the support surface (Fig 6, [0054], object-side lens portion 5a (contact portion) with which the object-side cylindrical portion 52 is in contact from the outer side in the radial direction); and the first O-ring (33) is compressed between the first lens and the peripheral wall surface or between the first lens and the support surface (Fig 6, [0050], elastic member 33 seals a space between the first lens 2 and the annular protrusion 26).
Regarding claim 2, Nakajima discloses wherein the first O-ring (33) is compressed in the optical axis direction (X2) between the end surface and the support surface (Fig 6, [0050], elastic member 33 seals a space between the first lens 2 and the annular protrusion 26).
Regarding claim 5, Nakajima discloses wherein, between an inner peripheral surface (35) of the first lens barrel (3) and an outer peripheral surface ([0053], outer peripheral surface of the object-side cylindrical portion 52) of the second lens barrel (22), an air passage communicating from a space between an end on the image side of the first lens barrel and an end on the image side of the second lens barrel to a space between the first lens ([0053], air between the first lens barrel member 21 holding the first lens 2 and the second lens barrel member 22) and the support surface and closer to an inner peripheral side than the first O-ring is provided (Fig 6, [0050], elastic member 33 seals a space between the first lens 2 and the annular protrusion 26).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3, 4, and 6 are 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: with respect to the allowable subject matter, none of the prior art either alone or in combination disclose or teach of the claimed combination of limitations to warrant a rejection under 35 USC 102 or 103.
Specifically, with respect to dependent claim 3, the prior art of Nakajima taken either singly or in combination with any other prior art fails to suggest such a lens unit comprising: “a third lens disposed on the image side of the second lens; and a second O-ring disposed between the second lens and the third lens, wherein the second lens barrel accommodates the third lens and the second O-ring, comprises an annular second caulking portion which is bent from a distal end part on the object side to an inner peripheral side and is brought into contact with an outer peripheral-edge portion of the second lens from the object side, and comprises a first stepped portion on an inner peripheral surface; the first stepped portion comprises an annular first seating surface facing the object side at a position overlapping the caulking portion when viewed from the optical axis direction and an inner peripheral-surface portion extending from an end on an inner peripheral side of the annular first seating surface to the image side; the outer peripheral-edge portion of the second lens is located between the caulking portion and the annular first seating surface; the third lens is supported from the image side at a predetermined position in the optical axis direction; and the second O-ring is compressed in the optical axis direction at a position adjacent to the inner peripheral-surface portion in the radial direction and exerts an urging force to urge the third lens toward the object side and to urge the third lens toward the image side”. Claims 4 and 6 are allowable due to pendency on dependent claim 3.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Komiyama (20180088297) and Recco (20060171046) are examples of an optical lens system capable of reducing focus deviation.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Sharrief I Broome whose telephone number is (571)272-3454. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-5pm, 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, 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.
Sharrief I. Broome
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2872
/SHARRIEF I BROOME/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872