Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/698,919

IMAGE CAPTURE AND LIGHT PROJECTION USING AT LEAST ONE LENS UNIT HAVING A TELECENTRIC IMAGE PLANE OR A TELECENTRIC OBJECT PLANE

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Apr 05, 2024
Examiner
NAZRUL, SHAHBAZ
Art Unit
2638
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Nil Technology Aps
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
90%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 1m
To Grant
95%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 90% — above average
90%
Career Allow Rate
569 granted / 634 resolved
+27.7% vs TC avg
Moderate +6% lift
Without
With
+5.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 1m
Avg Prosecution
20 currently pending
Career history
654
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.7%
-37.3% vs TC avg
§103
39.8%
-0.2% vs TC avg
§102
34.0%
-6.0% vs TC avg
§112
10.2%
-29.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 634 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 . 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 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. (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. Claims 1-4, 7, 9-10, 14-15, 17 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and/or 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Blahnik et al. (US 20180210173, hereinafter Blahnik). Regarding claim 1 Blahnik discloses, an apparatus (fig. 1) comprising: a first lens unit (camera lens 16); a second lens unit (lens 10) operable to be placed into optical alignment with the first lens unit (¶0002, fig. 1); and an image sensor (sensor 20, fig. 1) operable to acquire an image based on light signals passing through the first and second lens units when the first and second lens units are optically aligned with one another (fig. 1, ¶0010, ¶0014, ¶0021, ¶0031), wherein at least one of the first or second lens units has a telecentric image plane or a telecentric object plane (In an exemplary embodiment, the object-side lens-element unit and the image-side lens-element unit are matched to one another in respect of telecentricity, numerical aperture, and/or field dimension – ¶0017. In this context, the object-side lens-element unit and the image-side lens-element unit are telecentric, have the same numerical aperture, and/or have the same field dimension. – ¶0018). Regarding claim 2 Blahnik discloses, the apparatus of claim 1 including an electronic device (fig. 4) having first and second parts that are coupled together (300 & 400, fig. 4), wherein the first and second parts are separated from one another by a space (this limitation could reasonably be understood met by defining a bare minimum space in the meeting place between units 300 and 400, while leaving vastly other portions thereof to be portions of units 300 and 400 separately, fig. 4) when the first (300, fig. 4) and second lens units (400, fig. 4) are optically aligned with one another (Abstract, ¶0018-0021), wherein the first lens unit and the image sensor are disposed within the first part, and the second lens unit is disposed within the second part (evident from fig. 4), wherein, when the first and second lens units are optically aligned with one another (see fig. 4, ... three lens-element units LE1, LE2, LE3 and a total of four lens elements, namely a first lens element 22, a second lens element 24, a third lens element 26, and a fourth lens element 28, along a central optical axis A. – ¶0046): the second lens unit has a telecentric image plane such that light rays passing through the second lens unit are focused on an intermediate image plane located in the space (¶0017-0021), and the first lens unit has a telecentric object plane that coincides with the intermediate image plane (By way of this relationship, also referred to as Kepler's condition, the focal points of the two lens-element units coincide and the intermediate image is imaged on the sensor area of the camera module by the second lens-element unit together with the optical unit of the camera module – ¶0014). Regarding claim 3 Blahnik discloses, the apparatus of claim 1, wherein at least one of the first or second lens units includes a stack of lenses (figs. 1-4, ¶0046). Regarding claim 4 Blahnik discloses, the apparatus of claim 1, wherein at least one of the first or second lens units includes a refractive lens (figs. 1-4, Abstract, The refractive power of the overall design is positive – ¶0046). Regarding claim 7 Blahnik discloses, the apparatus of claim 2, wherein the first and second parts are operable to be moved relative to one another and to be placed in an overlapping position such that the first and second lens units are optically aligned with one another (see ¶0018-0021, ¶0067, fig. 4). Regarding claim 9 Blahnik discloses, the apparatus of claim 2 wherein the second lens unit is disposed between first and second coverglasses (second lens unit is disposed between first and second coverglasses 22 and 28, fig. 1), and wherein the first lens unit is disposed between a third coverglass and the image sensor (first lens unit 16 is disposed between a third coverglass 14 and the image sensor 20, fig. 1). Regarding claim 10 Blahnik discloses, an electronic device (fig. 4, ¶0003) comprising: first and second parts that are coupled together (fig. 4), the first part housing a first lens unit (lens element system 300) and an image sensor (camera module 12, fig. 4), and the second part housing a second lens unit (lens element system 400, fig. 4), wherein the first and second parts are operable to be moved relative to one another and to be placed in an overlapping position such that the first and second lens units are optically aligned with one another (see ¶0018-0021, ¶0067), wherein, when the first and second lens units are optically aligned with one another (see fig. 4): the first and second parts are separated from one another by a space (this limitation could reasonably be understood met by defining a bare minimum space in the meeting place between units 300 and 400, while leaving vastly other portions thereof to be portions of units 300 and 400 separately, fig. 4), the second lens unit has a telecentric image plane such that light rays passing through the second lens unit are focused on an intermediate image plane located in the space (fig. 4, ¶0018-0021), and the first lens unit has a telecentric object plane that coincides with the intermediate image plane (The object-side lens-element unit and the image-side lens-element unit are configured to generate an intermediate image between the object-side lens-element unit and the image-side lens-element unit. – Abstract This means that the image-side supplementary optical unit is designed in such a way that the intermediate plane, which is provided in accordance with a Kepler-type design, is imaged substantially 1:1 onto the sensor plane of the camera module, and vice versa. – ¶0031); the image sensor being operable to acquire an image based on light signals passing through the first and second lens units when the first and second lens units are optically aligned with one another (Abstract, fig. 4, ¶0018-0021). Regarding claim 14 Blahnik discloses, the electronic device of claim 10, wherein at least one of the first or second lens units includes a stack of lenses (figs. 1-4). Regarding claim 15 Blahnik discloses, the electronic device of claim 14 wherein at least one of the first or second lens units includes a refractive lens (figs. 1-4, Abstract, The refractive power of the overall design is positive – ¶0046). Regarding method claim(s) 17, although wording is different, the material is considered substantively equivalent to the apparatus claim(s) 7 as described above. 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 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 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 of this title, 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 5-6, 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blahnik in view of Devlin et al. (US 20210028215 A1; hereinafter Devlin). Regarding claim 5 Blahnik discloses, the apparatus of claim 1, except, wherein at least one of the first or second lens units includes a metalens. However, metalenses have been proposed to be used in camera equipment before. E.g., Devlin discloses that lenses can be made of metalenses (Abstract, ¶0002-0003, ¶0051). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to modify the invention of Blahnik with the teaching of Devlin of using metalenses within a train of lenses used for optical lens system, so that at least one of the first or second lens units includes a metalens, because, metalenses are able to design better, efficient and simpler telecentric optical systems (¶0095). Regarding claim 6 Blahnik discloses, the apparatus of claim 1, wherein each of the first and second lens units includes a respective stack of lenses, Blahnik is not found disclosing expressly, wherein at least one of the first or second lens units includes a metalens. However, metalenses have been proposed to be used in camera equipment before. E.g., Devlin discloses that lenses can be made of metalenses (Abstract, ¶0002-0003, ¶0051). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to modify the invention of Blahnik with the teaching of Devlin of using metalenses within a train of lenses used for optical lens system, so that at least one of the first or second lens units includes a metalens, because, metalenses are able to design better, efficient and simpler telecentric optical systems (¶0095). Regarding claim 16 Blahnik discloses, the electronic device of claim 15 except, wherein at least one of the first or second lens units includes a metalens. However, metalenses have been proposed to be used in camera equipment before. E.g., Devlin discloses that lenses can be made of metalenses (Abstract, ¶0002-0003, ¶0051). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to modify the invention of Blahnik with the teaching of Devlin of using metalenses within a train of lenses used for optical lens system, so that at least one of the first or second lens units includes a metalens, because, metalenses are able to design better, efficient and simpler telecentric optical systems (¶0095). Claims 8, 11-13, 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blahnik in view of Jung et al. (US 20220252863 A1; hereinafter Jung). Regarding claim 8, Blahnik discloses the apparatus of claim 7 except, wherein the first and second parts are coupled to one another by a hinge about which at least one of the first or second parts can rotate. However, Jung discloses that first and second optical modules 100 & 200 may face each other to be aligned optically (figs. 7-9, ¶0066) by means of a hinge that rotates bodies 20 and 30 around the hinge (figs. 1-2, ¶0066, abstract) Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to modify the invention of Blahnik to include the teaching of Jung of using hinge structure so that supplementary lens group 200 rotates with respect to primary lens group 100 to be aligned in optical axis, to obtain, wherein the first and second parts are operable to be moved relative to one another and to be placed in an overlapping position such that the first and second lens units are optically aligned with one another, because, combining prior art elements ready to be improved according to known method to yield predictable results is obvious. Regarding claim 11 Blahnik discloses, the electronic device of claim 10 except, further comprising an interactive display screen on at least one of the first or second parts. However, Jung discloses, a display unit and cover glasses 22 and 32 may be disposed on one surface of the main bodies 20 and 30. A first display unit and a first cover glass 22 may be disposed on one surface of the first main body 20. A second display unit and a second cover glass 32 may be disposed on one surface of the second main body 30. The first display unit and the second display unit may be integrally formed. The first display unit and the second display unit may be foldable. The first display unit and the second display unit are foldable. The first cover glass 22 and the second cover glass 32 may be integrally formed. The first cover glass 22 and the second cover glass 32 may be foldable. The first cover glass 22 and the second cover glass 32 may be folded. A first display unit may be disposed inside the first cover glass 22. A second display unit may be disposed in the second cover glass 32. The display unit may output an image photographed by the camera module. When the main bodies 20 and 30 are foldable so that the first main body 20 and the second main body 30 face each other, the first cover glass 22 and the second cover glass 32 face each other, and the first optical module 100 and the second optical module 200 may face each other [¶0066]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to include the telecentric optical paths of Blahnik in the optical modules 100 and 200 of Jung’s smartphone 10, to obtain, device further comprising an interactive display screen on at least one of the first or second parts, because, combining prior art elements ready to be improved according to known method to yield predictable results is obvious. Furthermore, such combination would enhance the overall versatility and usability of the electronic device. Regarding claim 12 Blahnik in view of Jung discloses, the electronic device of claim 10, wherein the electronic device is a smartphone (Jung: ¶0064). Regarding claim 13 Blahnik in view of Jung discloses, the electronic device of claim 12 wherein the first and second parts are coupled to one another by a hinge (see figs. 1-2 of Jung, ¶0066) about which at least one of the first or second parts can rotate (see figs. 1-2 of Jung, ¶0066). Regarding method claim(s) 18, although wording is different, the material is considered substantively equivalent to the apparatus claim(s) 8 as described above. Claims 19-22, 25, 27, 29, 31 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blahnik in view of Zhang et al. (CN 202022640806 U; hereinafter Zhang, English translation attached). Regarding claim 19, Blahnik discloses an apparatus (fig. 1) comprising: a first lens unit (camera lens 16); a second lens unit (lens 10) operable to be placed into optical alignment with the first lens unit (¶0002, fig. 1); and d light rays that pass through the first and second lens units when the first and second lens units are optically aligned with one another (fig. 1, ¶0010, ¶0014, ¶0021, ¶0031), wherein at least one of the first or second lens units has a telecentric image plane or a telecentric object plane (In an exemplary embodiment, the object-side lens-element unit and the image-side lens-element unit are matched to one another in respect of telecentricity, numerical aperture, and/or field dimension – ¶0017. In this context, the object-side lens-element unit and the image-side lens-element unit are telecentric, have the same numerical aperture, and/or have the same field dimension. – ¶0018). Blahnik is not found disclosing a light emitter operable to produce light rays. However, Zhang discloses internal reflection type telecentric lens (abstract), wherein, a reflecting device is arranged in the telecentric lens; the incident discrete collimated light beam is reflected and emitted from the lens assembly to form a speckle light lattice on the imaging surface (page 6, ¶4). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to use the optical device of Blahnik, in the portable projection device meant to be used in a mobile phone or the like as disclosed in Zhang (see Zhang page 2, background ¶2), to obtain, a light emitter operable to produce light rays, because, combining prior art elements ready to be improved according to known method to yield predictable results is obvious. Furthermore, such combination would enhance the versatility and usability of the overall device. Regarding claim 20, Blahnik in view of Zhang discloses the apparatus of claim 19. Blahnik further discloses apparatus including an electronic device having first and second parts that are coupled together (300 & 400, fig. 4), wherein the first and second parts are separated from one another by a space (this limitation could reasonably be understood met by defining a bare minimum space in the meeting place between units 300 and 400, while leaving vastly other portions thereof to be portions of units 300 and 400 separately, fig. 4) when the first (300, fig. 4) and second lens units (400, fig. 4) are optically aligned with one another (Abstract, ¶0018-0021), wherein the first lens unit and the light emitter are disposed within the first part, and the second lens unit is disposed within the second part (evident from fig. 4), wherein, when the first and second lens units are optically aligned with one another (see fig. 4, ... three lens-element units LE1, LE2, LE3 and a total of four lens elements, namely a first lens element 22, a second lens element 24, a third lens element 26, and a fourth lens element 28, along a central optical axis A. – ¶0046): the first lens unit has a telecentric image plane such that light rays produced by the light emitter and passing through the first lens unit are focused on an intermediate image plane located in the space (¶0017-0021), and the second lens unit has a telecentric object plane that coincides with the intermediate image plane (By way of this relationship, also referred to as Kepler's condition, the focal points of the two lens-element units coincide and the intermediate image is imaged on the sensor area of the camera module by the second lens-element unit together with the optical unit of the camera module – ¶0014). Regarding claim 21 Blahnik in view of Zhang discloses, the apparatus of claim 19, wherein at least one of the first or second lens units includes a stack of lenses (evident from Blahnik figs. 1-4). Regarding claim 22 Blahnik in view of Zhang discloses, the apparatus of claim 19, wherein at least one of the first or second lens units includes a refractive lens (Blahnik, figs. 1-4, Abstract, The refractive power of the overall design is positive – ¶0046). Regarding claim 25 Blahnik in view of Zhang discloses, the apparatus of claim 20 wherein the first and second parts are operable to be moved relative to one another and to be placed in an overlapping position such that the first and second lens units are optically aligned with one another (Blahnik, see ¶0018-0021, ¶0067, fig. 4). Regarding claim 27 Blahnik discloses, an electronic device (fig. 4, ¶0003) comprising: first and second parts that are coupled together (fig. 4), the first part housing a first lens unit (lens element system 300) wherein the first and second parts are operable to be moved relative to one another and to be placed in an overlapping position such that the first and second lens units are optically aligned with one another (see ¶0018-0021, ¶0067), wherein, when the first and second lens units are optically aligned with one another (see fig. 4): the first and second parts are separated from one another by a space (this limitation could reasonably be understood met by defining a bare minimum space in the meeting place between units 300 and 400, while leaving vastly other portions thereof to be portions of units 300 and 400 separately, fig. 4), the first lens unit has a telecentric image plane such that the light rays the second lens unit has a telecentric object plane that coincides with the intermediate image plane (The object-side lens-element unit and the image-side lens-element unit are configured to generate an intermediate image between the object-side lens-element unit and the image-side lens-element unit. – Abstract This means that the image-side supplementary optical unit is designed in such a way that the intermediate plane, which is provided in accordance with a Kepler-type design, is imaged substantially 1:1 onto the sensor plane of the camera module, and vice versa. – ¶0031). Blahnik is not found disclosing a light emitter operable to produce light rays. However, Zhang discloses internal reflection type telecentric lens (abstract), wherein, a reflecting device is arranged in the telecentric lens; the incident discrete collimated light beam is reflected and emitted from the lens assembly to form a speckle light lattice on the imaging surface (page 6, ¶4). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to use the optical device of Blahnik, in the portable projection device meant to be used in a mobile phone or the like as disclosed in Zhang (see Zhang page 2, background ¶2), to obtain, a light emitter operable to produce light rays, because, combining prior art elements ready to be improved according to known method to yield predictable results is obvious. Furthermore, such combination would enhance the versatility and usability of the overall device. Regarding method claim(s) 29, although wording is different, the material is considered substantively equivalent to the apparatus claim(s) 25 as described above. Regarding claim 31 Blahnik in view of Zhang discloses, the method of claim 29, wherein the light rays pass through the first and second lens units and form a pattern on one or more objects (Zhang, projection pattern, page 7, ¶4). Claims 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blahnik in view of Zhang and further in view of Jung. Regarding claim 30 Blahnik in view of Zhang discloses, the method of claim 29, except, including rotating at least one of the first and second parts about a hinge that couples the first and second parts together. However, Jung discloses that first and second optical modules 100 & 200 may face each other to be aligned optically (figs. 7-9, ¶0066) by means of a hinge that rotates bodies 20 and 30 around the hinge (figs. 1-2, ¶0066, abstract) Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to modify the invention of Blahnik to include the teaching of Jung of using hinge structure so that supplementary lens group 200 rotates with respect to primary lens group 100 to be aligned in optical axis, to obtain, wherein the first and second parts are operable to be moved relative to one another and to be placed in an overlapping position such that the first and second lens units are optically aligned with one another, because, combining prior art elements ready to be improved according to known method to yield predictable results is obvious. Claims 23-24, 28 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blahnik in view of Zhang and further in view of Devlin et al. (US 20210028215 A1; hereinafter Devlin). Regarding claim 23 Blahnik in view of Zhang discloses, the apparatus of claim 1, except, wherein at least one of the first or second lens units includes a metalens. However, metalenses have been proposed to be used in camera equipment before. E.g., Devlin discloses that lenses can be made of metalenses (Abstract, ¶0002-0003, ¶0051). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to modify the invention of Blahnik with the teaching of Devlin of using metalenses within a train of lenses used for optical lens system, so that at least one of the first or second lens units includes a metalens, because, metalenses are able to design better, efficient and simpler telecentric optical systems (¶0095). Regarding claim 24 Blahnik in view of Zhang discloses, the apparatus of claim 1, wherein each of the first and second lens units includes a respective stack of lenses, Blahnik is not found disclosing expressly, wherein at least one of the first or second lens units includes a metalens. However, metalenses have been proposed to be used in camera equipment before. E.g., Devlin discloses that lenses can be made of metalenses (Abstract, ¶0002-0003, ¶0051). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to modify the invention of Blahnik with the teaching of Devlin of using metalenses within a train of lenses used for optical lens system, so that at least one of the first or second lens units includes a metalens, because, metalenses are able to design better, efficient and simpler telecentric optical systems (¶0095). Regarding claim 28, Blahnik in view of Zhang discloses the electronic device of claim 27 except, wherein at least one of the first or second lens units includes a metalens. However, metalenses have been proposed to be used in camera equipment before. E.g., Devlin discloses that lenses can be made of metalenses (Abstract, ¶0002-0003, ¶0051). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to modify the invention of Blahnik with the teaching of Devlin of using metalenses within a train of lenses used for optical lens system, so that at least one of the first or second lens units includes a metalens, because, metalenses are able to design better, efficient and simpler telecentric optical systems (¶0095). Claims 26 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blahnik in view of Zhang and further in view of DE JAGER et al. (US 20160266498 A1; hereinafter DE JAGER). Regarding claim 26 Blahnik in view of Zhang discloses, the apparatus of claim 19, except, wherein the light emitter includes addressable VCSELs. However, DE JAGER discloses light emitter includes addressable VCSELs (abstract, ¶0020, 0054). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to implement the projection emitter of Zhang using addressable VCSELs of De Jager, because, combining prior art elements ready to be improved according to known method to yield predictable results is obvious. Conclusion The prior and/or pertinent art(s) made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure, are –Zhu et al. (US 20220203832 A1), YAMAMOTO (US 20100315598 A1) – who disclose optical modules having tele-centrism feature. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHAHBAZ NAZRUL whose telephone number is (571)270-1467. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th: 9.30 am-3 pm, 6.30 pm-9 pm, F: 9.30 am-1.30 pm, 4 pm-8 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, Lin Ye can be reached on 571-272-7372. 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. /SHAHBAZ NAZRUL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2638
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 05, 2024
Application Filed
Dec 27, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12587761
IMAGING APPARATUS, DRIVE METHOD OF IMAGING APPARATUS, AND PROGRAM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12578626
CAMERA DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12581766
SOLID-STATE IMAGING DEVICE AND ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12579832
LIDAR MANAGED IMAGE GENERATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12563293
AUTOMATIC FOCUS CONTROL DEVICE, OPERATION METHOD OF AUTOMATIC FOCUS CONTROL DEVICE, OPERATION PROGRAM OF AUTOMATIC FOCUS CONTROL DEVICE, AND IMAGING APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 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
90%
Grant Probability
95%
With Interview (+5.5%)
2y 1m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 634 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