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 .
Election/Restrictions
In response to the Election/Restriction mailed to applicant on 02/25/2026, applicant has made an Election without traverse of Invention in the reply of 04/10/2026.
As a result of applicant’s election, claims 1-9, 12-13 and 16 are examined in the present office action, and claims 10-11 and 14-15 have been withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to nonelected Inventions II and III.
Applicant should note that the claims 10-11 and 14-15 will be rejoined if the linking claim 1 is later found as an allowable claim.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Drawings
The drawings contain sixteen sheets of figures 1, 2A-2D, 3, 4A-4D, 5, 6A-6D, 7, 8A-8D, 9, 10A-10D, 11, 12A-12D and 13 were received on 04/25/2024. These drawings are approved by the examiner.
Specification
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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
7. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
8. Claims 1-9, 12-13 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for the following reasons.
a) Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for the following reasons.
a1) the feature thereof “the object side” (line 19) lacks a proper antecedent basis. Applicant should note that while the claim recites an object side on line 1 of the claim; however, such feature is implied/referred to an object side of the zoom lens. The claim does not provide a proper antecedent basis for the so-called terms “an object side” of a positive lens; and
a2) the feature thereof “the positive lens” (line 19) lacks a proper antecedent basis. Further, it is completely unclear about the structural relationship(s) among the so-called “the first positive lens” and the lens groups/units constituted the zoom lens. Does applicant intend to mean --the positive lens unit--?
For the purpose of examination, the feature thereof “the object side of the positive lens” recited in the claim on line 19 is understood as --an object side of the positive lens unit--.
b) Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for the similar reasons as mentioned in element a) above.
c) The remaining claims are dependent upon the rejected base claim and thus inherit the deficiencies thereof.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
9. 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.
10. 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.
11. Claims 1-9, 12-13 and 16, as best as understood, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sakamoto (US Patent No. 8,736,969).
Sakamoto discloses a zoom lens.
a) Regarding present claims 1 and 16, the zoom lens of the Numerical Embodiment 5 as described in columns 4, 15-17 and 19-20 and shown in figs. 9, 13A and 14 comprises a zoom lens for use in an optical device such as a camera which comprises a body for supporting the zoom lens and an image sensor configured to capture an image of an object via the zoom lens, see columns 19-20 and fig. 14.
Regarding the structure of the zoom lens of the Numerical Embodiment 5, in columns 15-17 and figs. 9 and 13A, the zoom lens comprises the following features;
a1) a first positive lens group (F), an intermediate group (LZ) and a rear positive lens group (R) arranged in that order from an object side to an image side of the zoom lens;
a2) the intermediate group (LZ) comprises a first negative lens unit (V1) constituted by two or more partial lens units, a second negative lens unit (C), and a positive lens unit (V2) wherein the lens units are arranged in that order from the object side to the image side of the zoom lens;
a3) the first negative lens unit (V1) is configured to monotonically move toward the image side while each of the second negative lens unit (C) and the second positive lens unit (V2) is moved in a non-linear manner between the object side and the image side of the zoom lens, see fig. 13A, thus a distance between two adjacent lens units changes during the zooming process;
a4) regarding the ranges governing the focal length, f1, of the first lens group and the focal length, fR, of the rear lens group, it is noted that the focal length, f1, of the first lens group is 55.94 mm, and the focal length, fR, of the rear lens group is 46.798 mm then the value of f1/fR is 1.20 which is inside the range of (1.00; 2.00) as claimed in each of claims 1 and 16. See optical characteristic of the zoom lens as provided in columns 15-17.
It is noted that Sakamoto does not clearly disclose the value of the lateral magnification of the positive lens unit (V2) of the zoom lens of the Numerical Embodiment 5 is inside the range of (-5.00; -1.00) as recited in each of claims 1 and 16; however, the value of the lateral magnification of the positive lens V2 is closed to the lower value of -5.00 of the range as claimed in each of claims 1 and 16 that there is not any unexpected result is obtained between the zoom lens provided by Sakamoto and that recited in each of claims 1 and 16 or it would have obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to utilize the zoom lens of the Numerical Embodiment 5 provided by Sakamoto and adjust the optical characteristics of the lens element(s) constituted the positive lens unit of the intermediate lens group of the zoom lens so that the value of the lateral magnification of the positive lens unit is inside the ranges claimed or any similar range(s) to meet a particular application. Applicant should further note that it has been held in the Courts that a discovery an optimum value or workable range involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233; In re Boesch, 617 F. 2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980); In re Wertheim, supra; Titanium Metals Corporation of America V. Banner, supra.
b) Regarding the conditions governing the relationships among the focal length, fP, of the positive lens unit V2, the focal length, fR, of the rear lens group, the focal length, fN, of the second lens unit (C), the focal length, fV, of the first negative lens unit V1, and the focal length, fPG1, of a positive lens included in the positive lens unit V2 as recited in the present claims 3-7 and 13, the following results have been obtained from the optical characteristic of the zoom lens as provided in columns 15-17:
Because the focal length, fP, of the positive lens unit V2 is 31.94 mm, the focal length, fR, of the rear lens group is 46.78 mm, the focal length, fN, of the second lens unit (C) is -37.90 mm, the focal length, fV, of the first negative lens unit V1 is -12.86 mm, see the Table of “Zoom lens unit data in column 16, and the focal length, fPG1, of the positive lens No. 14, see the Table of Single lens data in columns 16-17, included in the positive lens unit V2 is 58.12 mm then
b1) the value of fP/fR is 0.68 which is inside the range of (0.30; 1.00) as recited in present claim 3;
b2) the value of fN/fR is -0.81 which is inside the range of (-3.00; -0.50) as recited in present claim 4;
b3) the value of fP/fN is -0.84 which is inside the range of (-1.00; -0.20) as recited in present claim 5;
b4) the value of fP/fV is -2.48 which is inside the range of (-4.00; -1.50) as recited in present claim 6;
b5) the value of fN/fV is 2.95 which is inside the range of (2.00; 10.00) as recited in present claim 7; and
b6) the value of fPG1/fP is 1.24 which is inside the range of (0.90; 1.80) as recited in present claim 13.
c) Regarding the ranges governing the lateral magnification of the first negative lens V1 and the lateral magnification of the second negative lens C, and the lateral magnification of the positive lens unit V2 as recited in present claims 2, 8-9 and 12, the similar opinion as that applied to the later magnification of the positive lens unit mentioned above is applied. In other words, the value of the ratio between the lateral magnification of the positive lens unit at its wide angle and telephoto states is close to the upper value of 1.20 of the range as claimed in claim 2, the value of the lateral magnification of the second negative lens C is closed to the upper value of 0.8 of the range as claimed in claim 8, the value of the lateral magnification of the first negative lens V1 is closed to the lower value of -0.35 of the range as claimed in claim 9 that there is not any unexpected result is obtained between the zoom lens provided by Sakamoto and that recited in each of claims 2, 8-9 and 12 or it would have obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to utilize the zoom lens of the Numerical Embodiment 5 provided by Sakamoto and adjust the optical characteristics of the lens element(s) constituted the positive lens unit of the intermediate lens group of the zoom lens so that the value of the lateral magnification of the positive lens unit is inside the ranges claimed or any similar range(s) to meet a particular application. Applicant should further note that it has been held in the Courts that a discovery an optimum value or workable range involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233; In re Boesch, 617 F. 2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980); In re Wertheim, supra; Titanium Metals Corporation of America V. Banner, supra.
Conclusion
12. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
13. The US Patent Nos. 5,917,658 and 8,743,469 are cited as of interest in that each discloses a zoom lens having a first positive lens group, an intermediate group and a rear positive lens group wherein the intermediate group comprises a first negative lens unit constituted by two or more partial lens units, a second negative lens unit, and a positive lens unit wherein the lens groups/ units are arranged in that order from the object side to the image side of the zoom lens; however, each embodiment provided in each mentioned Patents does not satisfy all condition/limitations as recited in each of present claims 1 and 16.
14. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THONG Q NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-2316. The examiner can normally be reached M - Th: 6:00 ~ 17:00.
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, STEPHONE B. ALLEN can be reached at (571) 272-2434. 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.
/THONG Q NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Prosecution Insights