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 .
Response to Amendment
The present office action is made in response to the amendment filed by applicant on 08/04/2026. It is noted that in the amendment, applicant has made changes to the claims. There was not any change being made to the abstract, the drawings and the specification.
Regarding the claims, applicant has amended claims 1 and 16 and added a new set of claims, i.., claims 17-18, into the application.
Response to Arguments
The amendments to the claims as provided in the amendment of 08/04/2026 and applicant's arguments provided in the mentioned amendment, pages 8-10, have been fully considered and resulted the following conclusions.
A) Regarding the claims, the following conclusions are made:
A1) because applicant has added two new claims, i.e., claims 17-18, into the application and has not canceled any claim from the application, thus the pending claims are claims 1-18; and
A2) a review of the newly-added claims 17-18 has resulted that each new claim further limits the subject matter recited in its base claim 1 thus claims 17-18 are grouped in to the elected Invention I. As a result, claims 1-9, 12-13 and 16-18 are examined in the present office action, and claims 10-11 and 14-15 have been withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to nonelected Inventions II and III.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.
B) Regarding the rejections of claims 1-9, 12-13 and 16 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, set forth in the office action of 05/04/2026, the amendments to the claims as provided in the amendment of 08/04/2026, and applicant’s arguments provided in the mentioned amendment, page 8, have been fully considered and are sufficient to overcome the rejections of claims 1-9, 12-13 and 16 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, set forth in the mentioned office action.
C) Regarding the rejection of claims 1-9, 12-13 and 16 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sakamoto (US Patent No. 8,736,969) set forth in the office action of 05/04/2026, the amendments to the claims as provided in the amendment of 08/04/2026, and applicant’s arguments provided in the mentioned amendment, pages 8-10, have been fully considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
7. Claims 1-4, 6, 8-9, 12-13 and 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamanashi (US Patent No. 5,917,658).
Yamanashi discloses a zoom lens system.
a) Regarding present claims 1 and 16-18, the zoom lens system of the Example 1 Numerical as described in columns 12-13, 16 and 21, Table 5 and shown in figs. 1 comprises a zoom lens system for use in an optical device which as understood by one skilled in the art comprises a body for supporting the zoom lens and an image sensor configured to capture an image of an object via the zoom lens system.
Regarding the structure of the zoom lens of the Example 1 as described in columns 12-13, 16 and 21, Table 5 and shown in figs. 1, the zoom lens system comprises the following features;
a1) a first positive lens group (G1), an intermediate group (G2-G4) and a rear positive lens group (G5) arranged in that order from an object side to an image side of the zoom lens system;
a2) the intermediate group (G2-G4) comprises a first negative lens unit (G2) constituted by two or more partial lens units, a second negative lens unit (G3), and a positive lens unit (G4) wherein the lens units are arranged in that order from the object side to the image side of the zoom lens system;
a3) each of the first negative lens unit (G2), the second negative lens unit (G3) and the positive lens unit (G4) is moved during a zooming process and the first negative lens unit (G2) is configured to monotonically move toward the image side, see column 16 and figs. 1, thus a distance between two adjacent lens units changes during the zooming process;
a4) each of the first positive lens group (G1) and the rear positive lens group (G5) is fixed/stationary during the zooming process;
a5) the positive lens unit (G4) of the intermediate group (G2-G4) comprises a negative lens, see column 16, the lens element with lens surfaces numbered as (r18, r19);
a6) regarding the ranges governing the focal length, f1, of the first lens group (G1) and the focal length, fR, of the rear lens group (G5), it is noted that the ratio of powers of the lens groups (G1, G3) is -0.55416 and the ratio of powers of the lens groups (G5, G3) is -0.73571 then the value of the ratio defined by the focal length, f1, of the first lens group (G1) and the focal length, fR, of the rear lens group (G5) is 1.33 which is inside the range of (1.00; 2.00) as claimed in each of claims 1 and 16 and is inside the range of (1.23; 2.00) as claimed in claim 17, and is inside the range of (1.297; 2.00) as claimed in claim 18. See optical characteristic of the zoom lens system as provided in column 21.
It is noted that Yamanashi does not clearly disclose the value of the lateral magnification of the positive lens unit (G4) of the zoom lens system of the Example 1 is inside the range of (-4.50; -1.00) as recited in each of claims 1 and 16; however, the value of the lateral magnification of the positive lens (G4) is closed to the lower value of -4.50 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 Yamanashi 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 system of the Example 1 provided by Yamanashi and adjust the optical characteristics of the lens element(s) constituted the positive lens unit (G4) of the intermediate lens group (G2-G4) of the zoom lens system so that the value of the lateral magnification of the positive lens unit (G4) 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 (G4), the focal length, fR, of the rear lens group (G5), the focal length, fN, of the second lens unit (G3), the focal length, fV, of the first negative lens unit (G2), and the focal length, fPG1, of a positive lens included in the positive lens unit (G4) as recited in the present claims 3-4, 6 and 13, the following results have been obtained from the optical characteristic of the zoom lens system as provided in columns 16 and 21:
From data of the zoom lens system of Example 1 as provided in column 21, the ratio of powers of the lens groups (G1, G3) is -0.55416, the ratio of powers of the lens groups (G2, G3) is 0.86305, the ratio of powers of the lens groups (G4, G3) is -0.72712, and the ratio of powers of the lens groups (G5, G3) is -0.73571 then
b1) the value of the ratio defined by the focal length, fP, of the positive lens unit (G4) and the focal length, fR, of the rear lens group (G5) is around 1.00 which is inside the range of (0.30; 1.00) as claimed in present claim 3;
b2) the value of the ratio defined by the focal length focal length, fN, of the second lens unit (G3) and the focal length, fR, of the rear lens group (G5) is around -0.73571 which is inside the range of (-3.00; -0.50) as recited in present claim 4;
b3) the value of the ratio defined by the focal length focal length, fP, of the positive lens unit (G4) and the focal length, fV, of the first negative lens unit (G2) is around -1.19 which is closed to the upper value of -1.50 of the range of (-4.00; -1.50) as recited in present claim 6;
While the zoom lens system of Example 1 provided by Yamanashi does not disclose that the value of ratio of fP/fV is inside the range of (-4.00; -1.50) as recited in claim 6; however, the value of -1.19 of the zoom lens system provided by Yamanashi is so closed to the upper value of -1.50 of the range as claimed in claim 6 that there is not any unexpected result or difference in optical performance occurred between a zoom lens system of Example 1 provided by Yamanashi nd the zoom lens of present claim 6. Thus it is expect that the zoom lens system of Example 1 provided by Yamanashi is working fine with the range of (0.38; 0.88). See In re Wertheim, supra; Titanium Metals Corporation of America V. Banner, supra.
Thus, the zoom lens system with feature related to the ratio of fP/fV as recited in present claim 6 is read from the zoom lens system of Example 1 provided by Yamanashi or it would have obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to utilize the zoom lens system of the Example 1 provided by Yamanashi and adjust the optical characteristics of the lens element(s) constituted the lens groups of the zoom lens so that the value of the ratio of fP/fV is inside the ranged 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).
b4) from data provided in column 16 then the power of the second negative lens unit (G3) is around -0.013467 mm-1, the focal length, fPG1, of the positive lens, see column 16 for the lens having lens surfaces numbered (r15, r16) included in the positive lens unit (G4) has a focal length of around 163.9 mm, and the ratio of powers of the lens groups (G5, G3) is -0.73571, see column 21, then the ratio between the focal length, fPG1, of the positive lens and the focal length, fP, of the positive lens unit (G4) is around 1.7 which is inside the range of (0.90; 1.80) as claimed in claim 13.
c) Regarding the ranges governing the lateral magnification of the first negative lens (G2) and the lateral magnification of the second negative lens (G3), and the lateral magnification of the positive lens unit (G4) 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 (G3) 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 (G2) 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 system of the Example 1 provided by Yamanashi 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.
Allowable Subject Matter
8. Claims 5 and 7 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if each mentioned claim is rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
9. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
a) The zoom lens having a first fixed positive lens group, an intermediate group having three or more lens units, and a rear fixed positive lens group as recited in dependent claim 5 wherein the intermediate group has a structure as recited in the features thereof “wherein the intermediate group …the wide-angle end” (claim 1 on lines 7-20) is allowable with respect to the prior art, in particular, the US Patent No, 5,917,658, by the limitation regarding the range governing the ratio defined by the focal lengths of the positive lens unit and the second negative lens unit of the intermediate group as recited in the feature thereof “The zoom lens … second negative lens unit” (claim 5 on lines 1-5). Such a zoom lens with all mentioned features is not disclosed in the prior art.
b) The zoom lens having a first fixed positive lens group, an intermediate group having three or more lens units, and a rear fixed positive lens group as recited in dependent claim 7 wherein the intermediate group has a structure as recited in the features thereof “wherein the intermediate group …the wide-angle end” (claim 1 on lines 7-20) is allowable with respect to the prior art, in particular, the US Patent No, 5,917,658, by the limitation regarding the range governing the ratio defined by the focal lengths of the first negative lens unit and the second negative lens unit of the intermediate group as recited in the feature thereof “The zoom lens … second negative lens unit” (claim 7 on lines 1-5). Such a zoom lens with all mentioned features is not disclosed in the prior art.
Conclusion
10. Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
11. 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