Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/645,388

OPTICAL IMAGING LENS

Non-Final OA §102
Filed
Apr 25, 2024
Examiner
CHOI, WILLIAM C
Art Unit
2872
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Genius Electronic Optical (Xiamen) Co. Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
92%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 3m
To Grant
97%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 92% — above average
92%
Career Allow Rate
1031 granted / 1114 resolved
+24.5% vs TC avg
Minimal +4% lift
Without
With
+4.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 3m
Avg Prosecution
21 currently pending
Career history
1135
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.7%
-39.3% vs TC avg
§103
26.8%
-13.2% vs TC avg
§102
51.9%
+11.9% vs TC avg
§112
12.9%
-27.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1114 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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 Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. 15/917,848, filed on 3/12/2018. Claim Objections Claim 15 (and corresponding dependent claims) is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 12, “concave” should be changed to --concave;--. Appropriate correction is required. 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) 8-10, 12, and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Huang (US 2019/0056568 A1). In regard to claim 8, Huang discloses an optical imaging lens, comprising a first lens element, a second lens element, a third lens element, a fourth lens element, a fifth lens element, a sixth lens element, a seventh lens element, and an eighth lens element sequentially arranged along an optical axis from an object side to an image side, each of the first lens element to the eighth lens element comprising an object-side surface facing toward the object side and allowing imaging rays to pass through and an image-side surface facing toward the image side and allowing the imaging rays to pass through (page 7, section [0101] – page 8, section [0110], Figure 1, “110, 120, 130, 140, 150, 160, 170, 180”), wherein: an optical axis region of the object-side surface of the third lens element is convex (Figure 1, “131”) and a periphery region of the object-side surface of the third lens element is concave (page 7, section [0104], Figure 1, “131,” re: object-side surface 131 includes at least one inflection point); a periphery region of the object-side surface of the fourth lens element is concave (Figure 1, “141”); the fifth lens element has positive refracting power (page 7, section [0106], Figure 1, “150”); an optical axis region of the image-side surface of the seventh lens element is concave (Figure 1, “172”); and lens elements of the optical imaging lens are only the eight lens elements describe above (Figure 1, “110, 120, 130, 140, 150, 160, 170, 180”); wherein the optical imaging lens satisfies: (G45+T5+G56)/T6≧1.800 → (0.118+0.584+0.080)/0.345 = 2.27 (page 10, TABLE 1), wherein G45 is an air gap from the fourth lens element to the fifth lens element along the optical axis, T5 is a thickness of the fifth lens element along the optical axis, G56 is an air gap from the fifth lens element to the sixth lens element along the optical axis, and T6 is a thickness of the sixth lens element along the optical axis. Regarding claim 9, Huang discloses wherein the optical imaging lens satisfies: (T6+T7+T8)/(G12+G45+G67)≦3.500 → (0.345+0.346+0.369)/(0.149+0.118+0.412) = 1.56 (page 10, TABLE 1), wherein T7 is a thickness of the seventh lens element along the optical axis, T8 is a thickness of the eighth lens element along the optical axis, G12 is an air gap from the first lens element to the second lens element along the optical axis, and G67 is an air gap from the sixth lens element to the seventh lens element along the optical axis. Regarding claim 10, Huang discloses wherein the optical imaging lens satisfies: T6/(G12+G45)≦1.600 → 0.345/(0.149+0.118) = 1.29 (page 10, TABLE 1), wherein G12 is an air gap from the first lens element to the second lens element along the optical axis. Regarding claim 12, Huang discloses wherein the optical imaging lens satisfies: (T4+T6)/G45≦6.000 → 0.262+0.345)/0.118 = 5.14 (page 10, TABLE 1), wherein T4 is a thickness of the fourth lens element along the optical axis. Regarding claim 14, Huang discloses wherein the optical imaging lens satisfies: (G34+G45)/G78≧1.500 → (0.41+0.118)/0.388 = 1.36 (page 10, TABLE 1), wherein G34 is an air gap from the third lens element to the fourth lens element along the optical axis, and G78 is an air gap from the seventh lens element to the eighth lens element along the optical axis. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-7 and 15-20 allowed. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The closest prior art by Chen (US 2018/0106988 A1) teaches an optical imaging lens comprising only eight lens elements wherein the periphery region of the object-side surface of the fifth lens element is concave; a periphery region of the image-side surface of the first lens element is concave; an optical axis region of the image-side surface of the third lens element is concave. However, Chen does not teach “a periphery region of the object-side surface of the third lens element is concave; and an optical axis region of the image-side surface of the fourth lens element is convex” as to claim(s) 1-7; or “wherein: an optical axis region of the image-side surface of the sixth lens element is concave” as to claim(s) 15-20, taking into account the objection made in the examination of the claim(s) Thus, the prior art taken either singly or in combination fails to anticipate or fairly suggest the limitations of applicant’s independent claims, in such a manner that a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102 or 103 would be proper. The claimed invention is therefore considered to be in condition for allowance as being novel and nonobvious over prior art. The prior art fails to teach a combination of all the claimed features as presented in claims 15-20: an optical imaging lens comprising only eight lens elements as claimed, specifically Claims 11 and 13 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: The prior art fails to teach a combination of all the claimed features as presented in claim 11: an optical imaging lens as claimed, specifically wherein the optical imaging lens satisfies: AAG/(G23+G45)≦5.500. The prior art fails to teach a combination of all the claimed features as presented in claim 13: an optical imaging lens as claimed, specifically wherein the optical imaging lens satisfies: ALT/(T4+G45)≦4.800. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILLIAM C CHOI whose telephone number is (571)272-2324. The examiner can normally be reached Monday- Friday, 9:00 am - 6:00 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, Pinping Sun can be reached at (571) 270-1284. 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. /WILLIAM CHOI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872 March 21, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 25, 2024
Application Filed
Mar 21, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12596264
DISPLAY APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12596246
OPTICAL SYSTEM AND HEAD MOUNTED DISPLAY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12596263
OPTICAL MODULE AND ELECTRONIC DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12591127
Optical Data Insertion
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12591132
METHODS AND APPARATUSES FOR SPATIALLY FILTERING OPTICAL PULSES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
92%
Grant Probability
97%
With Interview (+4.1%)
2y 3m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1114 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow 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