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 .
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.
Election/Restrictions
Claim 16 is withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on April 23, 2026.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claims 8 and 9 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.
In regard to claims 8 and 9, the limitations, “the optical system includes no reflecting surface having power” and “the optical system includes no reflecting surface” renders the scope of the claim unclear because lenses will have some amount of reflection. For examination purposes, it is presumed that there are no dedicated mirror surfaces as part of the optical system.
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 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ichimura (US 2015/0077848 A1) in view of Ichimura (US 2015/0234157 A1), hereinafter Ichimura ‘157.
In regard to claim 1, Ichimura discloses an optical system including an intermediate image forming position IM (see e.g. paragraph [0058] and Figure 1) inside the optical system (see e.g. Figure 1), the intermediate image forming position IM being conjugate with each of an enlargement conjugate point on an enlargement side and a reduction conjugate point on a reduction side (see e.g. abstract), the optical system comprising (see e.g. Figure 1):
an enlargement optical system (see e.g. annotated Figure 1 below) located closer to the enlargement side (denoted magnification side, see e.g. annotated Figure 1 below) than the intermediate image forming position IM (see e.g. annotated Figure 1 below); and
a relay optical system (see e.g. annotated Figure 1 below) located closer to the reduction side (denoted reduction side, see e.g. annotated Figure 1 below) than the intermediate image forming position IM (see e.g. annotated Figure 1 below),
the relay optical system including (see e.g. annotated Figure 1 below):
a positive lens element L3 disposed on a most reduction side (see e.g. annotated Figure 1 below), and
a focusing lens group L2 on a most enlargement side,
the focusing lens group L2 including two negative lens elements having negative power (see e.g. Figure 1).
Ichimura fails to disclose
the focusing lens group moves in an optical axis direction during focusing,
the optical system satisfying Expression (1) below: 0.65 < |dn/fFg1| < 2.29 ... Expression (1) where dn is a maximum value of a distance on the optical axis between the two negative lens elements, and fFg1 is a focal distance of the focusing lens group.
However, Ichimura ‘157 discloses
the focusing lens group moves in an optical axis direction during focusing (see e.g. paragraph [0028]).
Further, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would recognize using the optical system satisfying Expression (1) below: 0.65 < |dn/fFg1| < 2.29 ... Expression (1) where dn is a maximum value of a distance on the optical axis between the two negative lens elements, and fFg1 is a focal distance of the focusing lens group, since it has been held that where the general condition of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art (see e.g. MPEP 2144.05).
Given the teachings of Ichimura ‘157, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Ichimura with the focusing lens group moves in an optical axis direction during focusing, the optical system satisfying Expression (1) below: 0.65 < |dn/fFg1| < 2.29 ... Expression (1) where dn is a maximum value of a distance on the optical axis between the two negative lens elements, and fFg1 is a focal distance of the focusing lens group.
Providing a moving focusing group would allow for the device to focus on a desired position. Further, optimizing the distance between the negative lens in the focus lens group relative to the focal length would allow a minimized size of the device.
PNG
media_image1.png
594
826
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In regard to claim 2, Ichimura discloses the limitations as applied to claim 1 above, and
ten or more lens elements including the positive lens element L3 and the two negative lens elements L2 (see e.g. Figure 1).
In regard to claim 3, Ichimura discloses the limitations as applied to claim 1 above, and
wherein the enlargement optical system includes a negative lens element (i.e. not labeled, see e.g. annotated Figure 1) disposed on a most enlargement side (see e.g. Figure 1 and note the enlargement optical system includes at least a negative lens element).
In regard to claim 4, Ichimura discloses the limitations as applied to claim 1 above, and
wherein the focusing lens group L2 is composed of a plurality of lens elements including a lens element disposed on the most enlargement side (i.e. left most in Figure 1), the lens element including a concave surface facing the enlargement side (see e.g. Figure 1).
In regard to claim 5, Ichimura discloses the limitations as applied to claim 1 above, and
wherein the focusing lens group L2 is composed of a plurality of lens elements including a lens element disposed on the most enlargement side (i.e. left most in Figure 1), the lens element having negative power (see e.g. Figure 1).
In regard to claim 6, Ichimura discloses the limitations as applied to claim 1 above, but fails to disclose
wherein Expression (2) below is satisfied, 1.63 < |BF2/fw| < 10.58 ... Expression (2) where BF2 is a minimum value of an air conversion length on a d line from the positive lens element on the most reduction side to a display element, and fw is a focal length of an entire system at a wide angle end.
However, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would recognize using wherein Expression (2) below is satisfied, 1.63 < |BF2/fw| < 10.58 ... Expression (2) where BF2 is a minimum value of an air conversion length on a d line from the positive lens element on the most reduction side to a display element, and fw is a focal length of an entire system at a wide angle end, since it has been held that where the general condition of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art (see e.g. MPEP 2144.05).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Ichimura with wherein Expression (2) below is satisfied, 1.63 < |BF2/fw| < 10.58 ... Expression (2) where BF2 is a minimum value of an air conversion length on a d line from the positive lens element on the most reduction side to a display element, and fw is a focal length of an entire system at a wide angle end.
Providing an optimized ration of the air conversion length to the focal length of the entire system would allow a minimized size of the device.
In regard to claim 7, Ichimura discloses the limitations as applied to claim 1 above, and
wherein Expression (3) below is satisfied, |ω| > 30 degrees ... Expression (3) where ω is a maximum half angle of view at a wide angle end (see e.g. Table 1 for ω of 59.9 which falls within applicant’s claimed range).
In regard to claim 8, Ichimura discloses the limitations as applied to claim 1 above, and
wherein the optical system includes no reflecting surface having power (see e.g. Figure 1 where there are no mirrored surfaces).
In regard to claim 9, Ichimura discloses the limitations as applied to claim 1 above, and
wherein the optical system includes no reflecting surface (see e.g. Figure 1 where there are no mirrored surfaces).
In regard to claim 10, Ichimura discloses the limitations as applied to claim 1 above, and wherein the focusing lens group L2 includes three or less lens elements including the two negative lens elements (see e.g. Figure 1).
In regard to claim 11, Ichimura discloses the limitations as applied to claim 1 above, and wherein the focusing lens group L2 is composed of the two negative lens elements (see e.g. Figure 1).
In regard to claim 12, Ichimura discloses the limitations as applied to claim 1 above, but fails to disclose
wherein Expression (4) below is satisfied, 0.23 < Tp/Tr < 1.11 Expression (4) where Tp is a distance from a surface on a most enlargement side to a surface on a most reduction side of the enlargement optical system, and Tr is a distance from a surface on the most enlargement side of the relay optical system to a surface on a most reduction side of the relay optical system at a wide angle end.
However, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would recognize using wherein Expression (4) below is satisfied, 0.23 < Tp/Tr < 1.11 Expression (4) where Tp is a distance from a surface on a most enlargement side to a surface on a most reduction side of the enlargement optical system, and Tr is a distance from a surface on the most enlargement side of the relay optical system to a surface on a most reduction side of the relay optical system at a wide angle end, since it has been held that where the general condition of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art (see e.g. MPEP 2144.05).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Ichimura with wherein Expression (4) below is satisfied, 0.23 < Tp/Tr < 1.11 ... Expression (4) where Tp is a distance from a surface on a most enlargement side to a surface on a most reduction side of the enlargement optical system, and Tr is a distance from a surface on the most enlargement side of the relay optical system to a surface on a most reduction side of the relay optical system at a wide angle end
Optimizing the distances occupied by the individual portions of the system relative to each other would allow for the device to be made smaller and would have predictable results.
In regard to claim 13, Ichimura discloses the limitations as applied to claim 1, but fails to disclose wherein Expression (5) below is satisfied, 0.16 < fp/fr < 0.75 Expression (5) where fp is a focal length of the enlargement optical system at a wide angle end, and fr is a focal length of the relay optical system at a wide angle end.
However, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would recognize using wherein Expression (5) below is satisfied, 0.16 < fp/fr < 0.75 ... Expression (5) where fp is a focal length of the enlargement optical system at a wide angle end, and fr is a focal length of the relay optical system at a wide angle end, since it has been held that where the general condition of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art (see e.g. MPEP 2144.05).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Ichimura with wherein Expression (5) below is satisfied, 0.16 < fp/fr < 0.75 ... Expression (5) where fp is a focal length of the enlargement optical system at a wide angle end, and fr is a focal length of the relay optical system at a wide angle end.
Optimizing the ratio of the focal lengths of the enlargement optical system to the relay optical system would provide a desired focal position and image size and would have predictable results.
In regard to claim 14, Ichimura discloses the limitations as applied to claim 1 above, but fails to disclose
wherein the enlargement optical system includes a lens element disposed on a most enlargement side, the lens element being fixed to the optical system during zooming.
However, Ichimura ‘157 discloses
wherein the enlargement optical system includes a lens element B1 disposed on a most enlargement side (see e.g. Figure 1), the lens element B1 being fixed to the optical system during zooming (see e.g. paragraph [0036]).
Given the teachings of Ichimura ‘157, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Ichimura with wherein the enlargement optical system includes a lens element disposed on a most enlargement side, the lens element being fixed to the optical system during zooming.
Providing stationary lenses in the system reduces the amount of distortion of the light (see e.g. paragraph [0036] of Ichimura ‘157).
In regard to claim 15, Ichimura, in view of Ichimura ‘157, discloses the optical system according to claim 1 (see e.g. rejection of claim1).
Ichimura fails to disclose
an image projection device comprising: an image forming element that generates an image to be projected onto a screen through the optical system.
However, Ichimura ‘157 discloses
an image projection device comprising: an image forming element that generates an image to be projected onto a screen through the optical system (see e.g. paragraph [0029] for projection optical system with display element and screen).
Given the teachings of Ichimura ‘157, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Ichimura, with an image projection device comprising: an image forming element that generates an image to be projected onto a screen through the optical system.
Doing so would provide a system that may be used as a projector which has the advantage of selecting the size of the image on the screen.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JESSICA M MERLIN whose telephone number is (571)270-3207. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7:00AM-5:00PM.
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, Jennifer Carruth can be reached at (571) 272-9791. 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.
/JESSICA M MERLIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2871
Prosecution Insights