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 § 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 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kurashige (US 20220373768).
Regarding claim 1, Kurashige discloses (Figs. 1-26; in particular Figs. 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13) an optical lens, comprising: a front lens group (G1) including a plurality of front lenses (L1n1-L1nr), wherein the plurality of front lenses include at least two aspherical lenses (L1n2, L1nr), one of the at least two aspherical lenses is a negative lens (L1n2) and has a surface facing an image side (side where I is located), another one of the at least two aspherical lenses is a negative lens (L1nr) and has a surface facing an object side (side opposite to where I is located), and the surface of the one of the at least two aspherical lenses (L1n2) and the surface of the another one of the at least two aspherical lenses (L1nr) are concave surfaces; a rear lens group (G2) including a plurality of rear lenses (L21-L24), wherein the plurality of rear lenses include at least one adhered lens (CL21) and an aspheric lens (L24); and an aperture (S) located between the front lens group and the rear lens group; wherein the front lens group (G1) and the rear lens group (G2) have positive diopters (L1p1, L21), and a total quantity of lenses of the plurality of front lenses (L1n1-L1nr) and the plurality of rear lenses (L21-L24) is at least four; wherein the optical lens meets a condition of: 0.6>an effective focal length of the front lens group/an effective focal length of the rear lens group>0.35 (sections 0073, 0077).
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.
Claims 2-6, 8, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kurashige in view of Jiang et al. (US 20190204569).
Regarding claim 2, Kurashige does not necessarily disclose the plurality of rear lenses include a first rear lens and a second rear lens sequentially arranged from the object side toward the image side, the first rear lens being an adhered lens, and the second rear lens being an aspherical lens; wherein the first rear lens includes a front lens piece, a middle lens piece, and a rear lens piece, the front lens piece is connected to one side of the middle lens piece, and the rear lens piece is connected to another side of the middle lens piece; wherein an absolute value of a difference between a dispersion coefficient of the middle lens piece and a dispersion coefficient of the front lens piece and the rear lens piece is greater than 30.
Jiang discloses (Figs. 1-19; in particular Fig. 4) the plurality of rear lenses (30) include a first rear lens (L5-L7) and a second rear lens (L8) sequentially arranged from the object side toward the image side, the first rear lens (L5-L7) being an adhered lens, and the second rear lens being an aspherical lens (L8); wherein the first rear lens includes a front lens piece (L5), a middle lens piece (L6), and a rear lens piece (L7), the front lens piece (L5) is connected to one side of the middle lens piece (L6), and the rear lens piece (L7) is connected to another side of the middle lens piece. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have an absolute value of a difference between a dispersion coefficient of the middle lens piece and a dispersion coefficient of the front lens piece and the rear lens piece is greater than 30, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the teaching of Jiang to obtain confocal image-capturing capability.
Regarding claim 3, Kurashige does not necessarily disclose the plurality of front lenses include a first front lens, a second front lens, a third front lens, and a fourth front lens sequentially arranged from the object side toward the image side, the second front lens and the third front lens being aspherical lenses.
Jiang discloses (Figs. 1-19; in particular Fig. 4) the plurality of front lenses (20) include a first front lens (L1), a second front lens (L2), a third front lens (L3), and a fourth front lens (L4) sequentially arranged from the object side (OS) toward the image side (IS), the second front lens (L2) and the third front lens (L3) being aspherical lenses. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the teaching of Jiang to obtain confocal image-capturing capability.
Regarding claim 4, Kurashige does not necessarily disclose diopters of the first front lens, the second front lens, the third front lens, the fourth front lens, the front lens piece, the middle lens piece, the rear lens piece, and the second rear lens are negative, negative, negative, positive, negative, positive, negative, and positive, in a sequence of the first front lens, the second front lens, the third front lens, the fourth front lens, the front lens piece, the middle lens piece, the rear lens piece, and the second rear lens.
Jiang discloses (Figs. 1-19; in particular Fig. 4) diopters of the first front lens (L1), the second front lens (L2), the third front lens (L3), the fourth front lens (L4), the front lens piece (L5), the middle lens piece (L6), the rear lens piece (L7), and the second rear lens (L8) are negative, negative, negative, positive, negative, positive, negative, and positive, in a sequence of the first front lens, the second front lens, the third front lens, the fourth front lens, the front lens piece, the middle lens piece, the rear lens piece, and the second rear lens (section 0043). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the teaching of Jiang to obtain confocal image-capturing capability.
Regarding claim 5, Kurashige does not necessarily disclose the first front lens, the fourth front lens, and the first rear lens are made of glass, and the second front lens, the third front lens, and the second rear lens are made of plastic.
Jiang discloses (Figs. 1-19; in particular Fig. 4) the first front lens, the fourth front lens, and the first rear lens are made of glass, and the second front lens, the third front lens, and the second rear lens are made of plastic (section 0022). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the particular lens be made of glass and plastic, since 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. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the teaching of Jiang to obtain confocal image-capturing capability.
Regarding claim 6, Kurashige discloses (Figs. 1-26; in particular Figs. 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15, 17, 19, 21) the plurality of front lenses include a first front lens (L1n1), a second front lens (L1n2), a third front lens (L1n3), a fourth front lens (L1p1), and a fifth front lens (L1nr) sequentially from the object side toward the image side, the third front lens and the fourth front lens being aspherical lenses (section 0171).
Regarding claim 8, Kurashige does not necessarily disclose the first front lens, the second front lens, the fifth front lens, and the first rear lens are made of glass, and the third front lens, the fourth front lens, and the second rear lens are made of plastic.
Jiang discloses (Figs. 1-19; in particular Fig. 4) the first front lens, the second front lens, the fifth front lens, and the first rear lens are made of glass, and the third front lens, the fourth front lens, and the second rear lens are made of plastic (section 0022). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the particular lens be made of glass and plastic, since 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. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the teaching of Jiang to obtain confocal image-capturing capability.
Regarding claim 10, Kurashige does not necessarily disclose an angle of a field of view of the optical lens is less than or equal to 185 degrees; wherein a relationship of an angle of half of the field of view of the optical lens corresponding to an image height meets a condition of: −0.6>90/Half-fov 90°×image height−80/Half-fov 80°×image height>−0.4.
Jiang discloses (Figs. 1-19; in particular Fig. 4) an angle of a field of view of the optical lens is less than or equal to 185 degrees (section 0038; greater than 180 degrees) and various relationships corresponding to field of view and image height (Tables 3, 5, 7, 9-10) (section 0042). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the particular field of view and image height, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the teaching of Jiang to obtain confocal image-capturing capability.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7 and 9 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 an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: the prior art does not disclose or suggest the optical lens of claim 7, in particular the limitations of diopters of the first front lens, the second front lens, the third front lens, the fourth front lens, the fifth front lens, the front lens piece, the middle lens piece, the rear lens piece, and the second rear lens are negative, negative, negative, negative, positive, negative, positive, negative, and positive, or negative, negative, negative, negative, positive, positive, negative, positive, and positive, in a sequence of the first front lens, the second front lens, the third front lens, the fourth front lens, the fifth front lens, the front lens piece, the middle lens piece, the rear lens piece, and the second rear lens. The prior art does not disclose or suggest the optical lens of claim 9, in particular the limitations of the optical lens meets a condition of: 17<TTL/EFL<17.5, a TTL being a total length of the optical lens, and an EFL being an effective focal length of the optical lens.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHARLES S CHANG whose telephone number is (571)270-5024. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:00 AM - 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, 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.
/CHARLES S CHANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2871