Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/658,057

OPTICAL IMAGING SYSTEM

Non-Final OA §102§DP
Filed
May 08, 2024
Examiner
HUANG, WEN
Art Unit
2872
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Samsung Electro-Mechanics Co., Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
82%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 10m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 82% — above average
82%
Career Allow Rate
448 granted / 550 resolved
+13.5% vs TC avg
Strong +24% interview lift
Without
With
+24.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
32 currently pending
Career history
582
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
42.4%
+2.4% vs TC avg
§102
32.9%
-7.1% vs TC avg
§112
13.3%
-26.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 550 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §DP
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 . Double Patenting The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969). A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP §§ 706.02(l)(1) - 706.02(l)(3) for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp. Claim(s) 1,7,9,10 is/are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim(s) 13 of U.S. Patent No. 12013592 in view of U.S. Patent No. 10365458. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the subject matter of the conflicting claim(s) of the instant application is disclosed in the conflicting claim(s) of the patent. For comparison, the claims are listed as follows side by side in the followingtable: Conflicting Claims of instant application No. 18658057 Conflicting claims US Patent No. 12013592 Claim 1: An optical imaging system comprising: a first lens having positive refractive power, a convex object-side surface in a paraxial region thereof and a concave image-side surface in a paraxial region thereof; a second lens having refractive power, a convex object-side surface in a paraxial region thereof and a concave image-side surface in a paraxial region thereof; a third lens having refractive power, a convex object-side surface in a paraxial region thereof and a concave image-side surface in a paraxial region thereof; a fourth lens having positive refractive power and a convex image-side surface in a paraxial region thereof; a fifth lens having negative refractive power; a sixth lens having refractive power; a seventh lens having refractive power, and an eighth lens having negative refractive power, wherein the first to eighth lenses are sequentially arranged from an object side of the optical imaging system, wherein the optical imaging system has a total of eight lenses, and wherein TTL/(2*IMG HT)<0.9, where TTL is an optical axis distance from the object-side surface of the first lens to an image capturing surface of an image sensor, and IMG HT is half of a diagonal length of the image capturing surface of the image sensor. Claim 1: An optical imaging system comprising: a first lens having positive refractive power, a second lens having positive refractive power, a third lens having negative refractive power, a fourth lens having positive refractive power, a fifth lens having negative refractive power, a sixth lens having refractive power, a seventh lens having positive or negative refractive power, and an eighth lens having negative refractive power, which are sequentially arranged from an object side of the optical imaging system, wherein at least three of the lenses have negative refractive power with a refractive index greater than 1.66, wherein TTL/(2*IMG HT)<0.9, where TTL is an optical axis distance from an object-side surface of the first lens to an image capturing surface of an image sensor, and IMG HT is half of a diagonal length of the image capturing surface of the image sensor, and wherein f/EPD<1.5, where f is an overall focal length of an imaging system including the lenses, and EPD is a diameter of an entrance pupil. Claim 10: The optical imaging system of claim 1, wherein the first lens has a convex object-side surface and a concave image-side surface. Claim 11: The optical imaging system of claim 10, wherein the second lens has a convex object-side surface and a concave image-side surface. Claim 12: The optical imaging system of claim 11, wherein the third lens has a convex object-side surface and a concave image-side surface. Claim 13: The optical imaging system of claim 12, wherein the fourth lens has a convex object-side surface and a convex image-side surface. Claim 7: The optical imaging system of claim 1, wherein the seventh lens has positive refractive power. Claim 1: An optical imaging system comprising: a first lens having positive refractive power, a second lens having positive refractive power, a third lens having negative refractive power, a fourth lens having positive refractive power, a fifth lens having negative refractive power, a sixth lens having refractive power, a seventh lens having positive or negative refractive power, and an eighth lens having negative refractive power, which are sequentially arranged from an object side of the optical imaging system, wherein at least three of the lenses have negative refractive power with a refractive index greater than 1.66, wherein TTL/(2*IMG HT)<0.9, where TTL is an optical axis distance from an object-side surface of the first lens to an image capturing surface of an image sensor, and IMG HT is half of a diagonal length of the image capturing surface of the image sensor, and wherein f/EPD<1.5, where f is an overall focal length of an imaging system including the lenses, and EPD is a diameter of an entrance pupil. Claim 9: The optical imaging system of claim 1, wherein f/EPD<1.5, where f is an overall focal length of the optical imaging system, and EPD is a diameter of an entrance pupil. Claim 1: An optical imaging system comprising: a first lens having positive refractive power, a second lens having positive refractive power, a third lens having negative refractive power, a fourth lens having positive refractive power, a fifth lens having negative refractive power, a sixth lens having refractive power, a seventh lens having positive or negative refractive power, and an eighth lens having negative refractive power, which are sequentially arranged from an object side of the optical imaging system, wherein at least three of the lenses have negative refractive power with a refractive index greater than 1.66, wherein TTL/(2*IMG HT)<0.9, where TTL is an optical axis distance from an object-side surface of the first lens to an image capturing surface of an image sensor, and IMG HT is half of a diagonal length of the image capturing surface of the image sensor, and wherein f/EPD<1.5, where f is an overall focal length of an imaging system including the lenses, and EPD is a diameter of an entrance pupil. Claim 10: The optical imaging system of claim 1, wherein at least three of the lenses have negative refractive power with a refractive index greater than 1.66. Claim 1: An optical imaging system comprising: a first lens having positive refractive power, a second lens having positive refractive power, a third lens having negative refractive power, a fourth lens having positive refractive power, a fifth lens having negative refractive power, a sixth lens having refractive power, a seventh lens having positive or negative refractive power, and an eighth lens having negative refractive power, which are sequentially arranged from an object side of the optical imaging system, wherein at least three of the lenses have negative refractive power with a refractive index greater than 1.66, wherein TTL/(2*IMG HT)<0.9, where TTL is an optical axis distance from an object-side surface of the first lens to an image capturing surface of an image sensor, and IMG HT is half of a diagonal length of the image capturing surface of the image sensor, and wherein f/EPD<1.5, where f is an overall focal length of an imaging system including the lenses, and EPD is a diameter of an entrance pupil. Regarding claim 1, US Patent No. 12013592 teaches in claim 13 all the subject matter of claim 1 of instant application except the concave/convex surfaces of the lenses are located in paraxial regions and the optical imaging system has a total of eight lenses. However, in an analogous optics field of endeavor, US Patent No. 10365458 teaches the concave/convex surfaces of the lenses are located in paraxial regions (Specification, Column 5, Lines 22-, “in a description for a shape of each of the lenses, the meaning that one surface of a lens is convex is that a paraxial region portion of a corresponding surface is convex, and the meaning that one surface of a lens is concave is that a paraxial region portion of a corresponding surface is concave.”). 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 concave/convex surfaces of the lenses are located in paraxial regions as taught by US Patent No. 10365458 in the teaching of US Patent No. 12013592 for the purposes of having desired imaging effects. Further US Patent No. 12013592 teaches in claim 1 the optical imaging system comprises eight lenses, which is equivalent to the optical imaging system has a total of eight lenses (claimed by the instant application in claim 1) or more. Regarding claims 7,9-10, US Patent No. 12013592 further teaches in claim 1 all the limitations as listed in the above table. Therefore although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they claim same subject matter. 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. (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 1,7-8,11-13,17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Li (US 20210018728, of record). PNG media_image1.png 452 638 media_image1.png Greyscale Regarding claim 1, Li teaches (Fig. 9, Tables 13-15, 5th example) An optical imaging system comprising: a first lens having positive refractive power (f1=6.72), a convex object-side surface (radius=2.3902) in a paraxial region thereof and a concave image-side (radius=5.5195) surface in a paraxial region thereof; a second lens having refractive power, a convex object-side surface (radius=318) in a paraxial region thereof and a concave image-side surface (radius=100) in a paraxial region thereof; a third lens having refractive power, a convex object-side surface (radius=3.2866) in a paraxial region thereof and a concave image-side surface (radius=2.48) in a paraxial region thereof; a fourth lens having positive refractive power (f4=3.22) and a convex image-side surface (radius=-1.835) in a paraxial region thereof; a fifth lens having negative refractive power (f5=-13.19); a sixth lens having refractive power; a seventh lens having refractive power, and an eighth lens having negative refractive power (f8=-2.69), wherein the first to eighth lenses are sequentially arranged from an object side of the optical imaging system (Fig. 9), wherein the optical imaging system has a total of eight lenses, and wherein TTL/(2*IMG HT)<0.9 (Table 15, 5.2/(2x3.56)), where TTL is an optical axis distance from the object-side surface of the first lens to an image capturing surface of an image sensor, and IMG HT is half of a diagonal length of the image capturing surface of the image sensor. Regarding claim 7, Li further teaches The optical imaging system of claim 1, wherein the seventh lens has positive refractive power (f7=9.11). Regarding claim 8, Li further teaches The optical imaging system of claim 1, wherein the eighth lens has a concave image-side surface in a paraxial region thereof (radius=3.3826). Regarding claim 11, Li The optical imaging system of claim 1, wherein a refractive index of the at least three of the lenses having negative refractive power (1.76, 1.69, 1.65 of 3rd,5th,8th lenses), among the first lens to the seventh lens, is greater than a refractive index of lenses having positive refractive power (1.59 of 1st lens). Regarding claim 12, Li further teaches The optical imaging system of claim 1, wherein a refractive index of at least one of the lenses having negative refractive power is greater than 1.68 (1.76 of 3rd lens). Regarding claim 13, Li further teaches The optical imaging system of claim 12, wherein the third lens has a refractive index greater than 1.68, and among the lenses, the refractive index of the third lens is the greatest (1.76). Regarding claim 17, Li further teaches The optical imaging system of claim 1, wherein an absolute value (Table 15: 2.69) of a focal length of the eighth lens is the least among the lenses. Claim(s) 1-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Dai (US 20220050268). PNG media_image2.png 602 696 media_image2.png Greyscale Regarding claim 1, Dai teaches (Fig. 7, Tables 7,25, Embodiment 4) An optical imaging system comprising: a first lens having positive refractive power (f1=7.31), a convex object-side surface (radius=2.7568) in a paraxial region thereof and a concave image-side (radius=7.9176) surface in a paraxial region thereof; a second lens having refractive power, a convex object-side surface (radius=6.5655) in a paraxial region thereof and a concave image-side surface (radius=4.3014) in a paraxial region thereof; a third lens having refractive power, a convex object-side surface (radius=8.0309) in a paraxial region thereof and a concave image-side surface (radius=12.5037) in a paraxial region thereof; a fourth lens having positive refractive power (f4=34.8) and a convex image-side surface (radius=-12.6491) in a paraxial region thereof; a fifth lens having negative refractive power (f5=-26.31); a sixth lens having refractive power; a seventh lens having refractive power, and an eighth lens having negative refractive power (f8=-5.24), wherein the first to eighth lenses are sequentially arranged from an object side of the optical imaging system (Fig. 7), wherein the optical imaging system has a total of eight lenses, and wherein TTL/(2*IMG HT)<0.9 (Table 25, Row 1, 1.11/2), where TTL is an optical axis distance from the object-side surface of the first lens to an image capturing surface of an image sensor, and IMG HT is half of a diagonal length of the image capturing surface of the image sensor. Regarding claim 2, Dai further teaches The optical imaging system of claim 1, wherein FOV>70° (45.7x2, derived from Row 2 of Table 25 with f=7.3 of Table 7, “fan” is typo for “tan”), where FOV is a field of view of an imaging system including the lenses. Regarding claim 3, Dai further teaches The optical imaging system of claim 1, wherein the fifth lens has a convex object-side surface (radius=201) in a paraxial region thereof and a concave image-side surface (radius=16.4) in a paraxial region thereof. Regarding claim 4, Dai further teaches The optical imaging system of claim 1, wherein the sixth lens has a convex image-side surface (radius=-10.5711) in a paraxial region thereof. Regarding claim 5, Dai further teaches The optical imaging system of claim 1, wherein the seventh lens has a concave image-side surface (radius=34) in a paraxial region thereof. Regarding claim 6, Dai further teaches The optical imaging system of claim 5, wherein the seventh lens has a convex object-side surface (radius=6.9) in a paraxial region thereof. Claim(s) 1,9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Zhang (US 20210255431). PNG media_image3.png 282 456 media_image3.png Greyscale Regarding claim 1, Zhang teaches (Figs. 17-18, Tables 25-28, Embodiment 9) An optical imaging system comprising: a first lens having positive refractive power (f1=4.64), a convex object-side surface (radius=1.79) in a paraxial region thereof and a concave image-side (radius=5.267) surface in a paraxial region thereof; a second lens having refractive power, a convex object-side surface (radius=6.44) in a paraxial region thereof and a concave image-side surface (radius=3.24) in a paraxial region thereof; a third lens having refractive power, a convex object-side surface (radius=2.25) in a paraxial region thereof and a concave image-side surface (radius=2.339) in a paraxial region thereof; a fourth lens having positive refractive power (f4=4.86) and a convex image-side surface (radius=-11) in a paraxial region thereof; a fifth lens having negative refractive power (f5=-5.33); a sixth lens having refractive power; a seventh lens having refractive power, and an eighth lens having negative refractive power (f8=-5.05), wherein the first to eighth lenses are sequentially arranged from an object side of the optical imaging system (Fig. 17), wherein the optical imaging system has a total of eight lenses, and wherein TTL/(2*IMG HT)<0.9 (0.89, Table 27, Fig. 18B, TTL=4.83, IMG HT=2.7), where TTL is an optical axis distance from the object-side surface of the first lens to an image capturing surface of an image sensor, and IMG HT is half of a diagonal length of the image capturing surface of the image sensor. Regarding claim 9, Zhang further teaches The optical imaging system of claim 1, wherein f/EPD<1.5 (Table 28, Row 1/TTL=6.16/4.83=1.28), where f is an overall focal length of the optical imaging system, and EPD is a diameter of an entrance pupil. Claim(s) 1,10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by You (US 20210364754). PNG media_image4.png 498 818 media_image4.png Greyscale Regarding claim 1, You teaches (Fig. 15, Tables 22-24, Embodiment 8) An optical imaging system comprising: a first lens having positive refractive power (f1=4.16), a convex object-side surface (radius=1.8) in a paraxial region thereof and a concave image-side (radius=7.495) surface in a paraxial region thereof; a second lens having refractive power, a convex object-side surface (radius=9.8) in a paraxial region thereof and a concave image-side surface (radius=4.1) in a paraxial region thereof; a third lens having refractive power, a convex object-side surface (radius=4.1) in a paraxial region thereof and a concave image-side surface (radius=3.95) in a paraxial region thereof; a fourth lens having positive refractive power (f4=12.22) and a convex image-side surface (radius=-12) in a paraxial region thereof; a fifth lens having negative refractive power (f5=-500); a sixth lens having refractive power; a seventh lens having refractive power, and an eighth lens having negative refractive power (f8=-11.93), wherein the first to eighth lenses are sequentially arranged from an object side of the optical imaging system (Fig. 15), wherein the optical imaging system has a total of eight lenses, and wherein TTL/(2*IMG HT)<0.9 (5.5/7.86), where TTL is an optical axis distance from the object-side surface of the first lens to an image capturing surface of an image sensor, and IMG HT is half of a diagonal length of the image capturing surface of the image sensor. Regarding claim 10, You further teaches The optical imaging system of claim 1, wherein at least three of the lenses have negative refractive power with a refractive index greater than 1.66 (1.68 for 3rd, 6th, 8th lenses). Claim(s) 1,16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Zhang1 (CN 108254890, as evidenced by the translation). PNG media_image5.png 488 452 media_image5.png Greyscale Regarding claim 1, Zhang1 teaches (Figs. 46-48) An optical imaging system comprising: a first lens having positive refractive power (f1=3.936), a convex object-side surface (radius=1.975) in a paraxial region thereof and a concave image-side (radius=21) surface in a paraxial region thereof; a second lens having refractive power, a convex object-side surface (radius=4.5) in a paraxial region thereof and a concave image-side surface (radius=2.6) in a paraxial region thereof; a third lens having refractive power, a convex object-side surface (radius=6.3) in a paraxial region thereof and a concave image-side surface (radius=4.582) in a paraxial region thereof; a fourth lens having positive refractive power (f4=18.8) and a convex image-side surface (radius=-110) in a paraxial region thereof; a fifth lens having negative refractive power (f5=-25.58); a sixth lens having refractive power; a seventh lens having refractive power, and an eighth lens having negative refractive power (f8=--2.771), wherein the first to eighth lenses are sequentially arranged from an object side of the optical imaging system (Fig. 46), wherein the optical imaging system has a total of eight lenses, and wherein TTL/(2*IMG HT)<0.9 (5.521/6.4), where TTL is an optical axis distance from the object-side surface of the first lens to an image capturing surface of an image sensor, and IMG HT is half of a diagonal length of the image capturing surface of the image sensor. Regarding claim 16, Zhang1 further teaches The optical imaging system of claim 1, wherein an absolute value (2002.955) of a focal length of the seventh lens is the greatest among the lenses. Claim(s) 1,14-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Xu (US 20200201002). PNG media_image6.png 488 690 media_image6.png Greyscale Regarding claim 1, Xu teaches (Figs. 1, Tables 1-3) An optical imaging system comprising: a first lens having positive refractive power (f1=4.14), a convex object-side surface (radius=1.8417) in a paraxial region thereof and a concave image-side (radius=8.73) surface in a paraxial region thereof; a second lens having refractive power, a convex object-side surface (radius=10.8758) in a paraxial region thereof and a concave image-side surface (radius=4.9) in a paraxial region thereof; a third lens having refractive power, a convex object-side surface (radius=3.678) in a paraxial region thereof and a concave image-side surface (radius=3.078) in a paraxial region thereof; a fourth lens having positive refractive power (f4=11.19) and a convex image-side surface (radius=-20) in a paraxial region thereof; a fifth lens having negative refractive power (f5=-116.99); a sixth lens having refractive power; a seventh lens having refractive power, and an eighth lens having negative refractive power (f8=-2.18), wherein the first to eighth lenses are sequentially arranged from an object side of the optical imaging system (Fig. 1), wherein the optical imaging system has a total of eight lenses, and wherein TTL/(2*IMG HT)<0.9 (4.81/6.2), where TTL is an optical axis distance from the object-side surface of the first lens to an image capturing surface of an image sensor, and IMG HT is half of a diagonal length of the image capturing surface of the image sensor. Regarding claim 14, Xu further teaches The optical imaging system of claim 1, further comprising a stop (STO in Fig. 1) disposed between the first lens and the second lens. Regarding claim 15, Xu further teaches The optical imaging system of claim 14, wherein SD/TD>0.8 (Table 1: 3.1769/3.9339=0.808), where SD is an optical axis distance from the stop to an image-side surface of the eighth lens, and TD is an optical axis distance from the object-side surface of the first lens to the image-side surface of the eighth lens. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WEN HUANG whose telephone number is (571)270-0234. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F: 9:00AM-4:00PM. 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, Pinping Sun can be reached on (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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /WEN HUANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872 wen.huang2@uspto.gov (571)270-0234
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 08, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 26, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601896
OPTICAL CAMERA LENS ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12591117
IMAGING LENS SYSTEM INCLUDING EIGHT LENSES OF +--++-+-, +--+--+- OR +---+-+- REFRACTIVE POWERS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12587728
COMPACT DOUBLE FOLDED TELE CAMERAS INCLUDING FOUR LENSES OF +-+-, +-++ OR +--+; OR SIX LENSES OF +-+-+- OR +-+--- REFRACTIVE POWERS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12585085
OPTICAL CAMERA LENS ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12585090
LOW TOTAL TRACK LENGTH LENS ASSEMBLY INCLUDING SEVEN LENSES OF +-+-++- REFRACTIVE POWERS FOR LARGE SENSOR FORMAT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 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
82%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+24.4%)
2y 10m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 550 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