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 amendment filed on 07/21/2026 has been entered.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1-18 in the reply filed on 07/21/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 19-31 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Group II, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 07/21/2026.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 15 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
Claim limitations of claim 15 fails to further limit the subject matter of claim 1 and failing to include all the limitations of claim 1 because the other surface of the plate-shaped light blocking element is referring to the plate-shaped light blocking element 130b, not 130a (see figs.1A-1C and para.75).
Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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 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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 10-12, 14 and 16-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tong CN 217484665 U (see document 18732776_2026-07-29_CN_217484665_U_M.pdf and use US 20230247273 as an English translation and citation purpose).
Regarding claim 1, Tong discloses an imaging lens assembly module, in at least figs.31-33, 29 and 30, comprising: an imaging lens element set (52) having an optical axis (OA) and comprising at least one lens element (fig.31);
at least one light folding element (55) configured to fold the optical axis at least once, and the at least one light folding element comprising an incident surface, an exit surface and at least one optical reflecting surface (551)(see fig.31); and
a plate-shaped light blocking element (51) keeping an air distance (a zero air distance) between the plate-shaped light blocking element and the at least one light folding element (para.123 discloses the light blocking sheet 51 is attached on one of the reflective surfaces 551 for reducing stray light generated from the reflective element 55, so that the layer 51 can on the upper surface 551 of 55 instead of bottom surface), and comprising:
at least two layered structures (see fig.31) disposed corresponding to the at least one light folding element (see fig.31); and
a plurality of columnar air structures (at least the air space between nanostructures of 516), the columnar air structures farther away from the at least one light folding element than a surface of the plate-shaped light blocking element from the at least one light folding element (see fig.31 and para.123, the columnar air structures will facing away from the light folding element 55), and the surface (the bottom surface of the layer 51, when the layer 51 formed on the upper surface of 55) of the plate-shaped light blocking element facing toward the at least one light folding element (para.123);
a thickness of the plate-shaped light blocking element is Dt, a depth of each of the columnar air structures is d (see fig.31).
Tong does not explicitly disclose the following condition is satisfied: 0.1≤d/Dt≤1.
However, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to modify Tong’s imaging lens assembly module to have the 0.1≤d/Dt≤1. One would have chosen the value of d/Dt according to a result effective variable balancing the need to form an imaging lens assembly module with a d/Dt while not making the d/Dt overly large or small to make the imaging lens assembly module unreliable. One would have been motivated to form the imaging lens assembly module to have the d/Dt within the claimed range for the purpose of reducing stray light generated from the reflective element and reducing reflection of stray light inside the holder (para.123) in order to have the imaging lens assembly module with high reliability. Also, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been led to have 0.1≤d/Dt≤1 through routine experimentation and optimization, in re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). The Applicant has not disclosed that the range is for a particular unobvious purpose, produce an unexpected/significant result, or are otherwise critical, and it appears prima facie that the process would possess utility using another range. Indeed, it has been held that mere range limitations are prima facie obvious absent a disclosure that the limitations are for a particular unobvious purpose, produce an unexpected result, or are otherwise critical. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have 0.1≤d/Dt≤1 in the imaging lens assembly module of Tong for the purpose of reducing stray light generated from the reflective element and reducing reflection of stray light inside the holder (para.123).
Regarding claim 2, Tong does not explicitly disclose the thickness of the plate-shaped light blocking element is Dt, the depth of each of the columnar air structures is d, and the following condition is satisfied: 0.3≤d/Dt≤0.95. However, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to modify Tong’s imaging lens assembly module to have the 0.3≤d/Dt≤0.95. One would have chosen the value of d/Dt according to a result effective variable balancing the need to form an imaging lens assembly module with a d/Dt while not making the d/Dt overly large or small to make the imaging lens assembly module unreliable. One would have been motivated to form the imaging lens assembly module to have the d/Dt within the claimed range for the purpose of reducing stray light generated from the reflective element and reducing reflection of stray light inside the holder (para.123) in order to have the imaging lens assembly module with high reliability. Also, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been led to have 0.3≤d/Dt≤0.95 through routine experimentation and optimization, in re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). The Applicant has not disclosed that the range is for a particular unobvious purpose, produce an unexpected/significant result, or are otherwise critical, and it appears prima facie that the process would possess utility using another range. Indeed, it has been held that mere range limitations are prima facie obvious absent a disclosure that the limitations are for a particular unobvious purpose, produce an unexpected result, or are otherwise critical. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have 0.3≤d/Dt≤0.95 in the imaging lens assembly module of Tong for the purpose of reducing stray light generated from the reflective element and reducing reflection of stray light inside the holder (para.123).
Regarding claim 3, Tong discloses the at least two layered structures comprise at least one cladding layer (516) and at least one base layer (a base layer of 51), a sum of a thickness of one of the at least one cladding layer and a thickness of one of the at least one base layer is Dm, the thickness of the plate-shaped light blocking element is Dt, and the following condition is satisfied: 0.5≤Dm/Dt≤1 (see fig.31, Dm/Dt=1).
Regarding claim 4, Tong discloses a number of the at least two layered structures of the plate-shaped light blocking element is two (see fig.31).
Regarding claim 10, Tong discloses an area of the surface of the plate-shaped light blocking element is A, an area of a region with the columnar air structures on the surface of the plate-shaped light blocking element is Ad, and the following condition is satisfied: 0.005≤Ad/A≤1 (see figs.29-31).
Regarding claim 11, Tong discloses the area of the surface of the plate-shaped light blocking element is A, the area of the region with the columnar air structures on the surface of the plate-shaped light blocking element is Ad, and the following condition is satisfied: 0.005≤Ad/A≤0.750 (see figs.29-31).
Regarding claim 12, Tong discloses the plate-shaped light blocking element further comprises an aperture structure (LPO), the aperture structure is disposed corresponding to the at least one light folding element (see fig.31 and para.123).
Regarding claim 14, Tong discloses an assembling portion (56, see figs.31 and 32), the assembling portion disposed corresponding to the surface of the plate-shaped light blocking element (see figs.31 and 32), wherein the assembling portion keeps a predetermined air distance between the plate-shaped light blocking element and the at least one light folding element (see figs.31 and 32 and para.123).
Regarding claim 16, Tong discloses the at least one light folding element is a prism (see figs.31-33).
Regarding claim 17, Tong discloses a camera module (5), in at least figs.31-33, comprising: the imaging lens assembly module of claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above); and an image sensor (it’s inherent to have an image sensor disposed on the image surface of the imaging lens assembly module) disposed on an image surface (54) of the imaging lens assembly module.
Regarding claim 18, Tong discloses an electronic device (7), in at least figs.31-33 and 37, comprising: the camera module of claim 17 (see rejection of claim 17).
Claim(s) 1-14 and 16-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tong CN 217484665 U (see document 18732776_2026-07-29_CN_217484665_U_M.pdf and use US 20230247273 as an English translation and citation purpose).
Regarding claim 1, Tong discloses an imaging lens assembly module, in at least figs.31-33 and 37, comprising: an imaging lens element set (52) having an optical axis (OA) and comprising at least one lens element (fig.31);
at least one light folding element (55) configured to fold the optical axis at least once, and the at least one light folding element comprising an incident surface, an exit surface and at least one optical reflecting surface (551)(see fig.31); and
a plate-shaped light blocking element (51) keeping an air distance (a zero air distance) between the plate-shaped light blocking element and the at least one light folding element (para.123 discloses the light blocking sheet 51 is attached on one of the reflective surfaces 551 for reducing stray light generated from the reflective element 55, so that the layer 51 can on the upper surface 551 of 55 instead of bottom surface), and comprising:
at least two layered structures (see fig.31) disposed corresponding to the at least one light folding element (see fig.31); and
a plurality of columnar air structures (at least the air space between nanostructures of 516), the columnar air structures farther away from the at least one light folding element than a surface of the plate-shaped light blocking element from the at least one light folding element (see fig.31 and para.123, the columnar air structures will facing away from the light folding element 55), and the surface (the bottom surface of the layer 51, when the layer 51 formed on the upper surface of 55) of the plate-shaped light blocking element facing toward the at least one light folding element (para.123);
a thickness of the plate-shaped light blocking element is Dt, a depth of each of the columnar air structures is d (see fig.31).
Figs.31-33 of Tong does not explicitly disclose the following condition is satisfied: 0.1≤d/Dt≤1.
Figs.1-12 and 22-30 of Tong discloses the plate-shaped light blocking element (11 or 41) can be the element 11 or 41 instead of the element 51 with the thickness of the plate-shaped light blocking element is Dt (D11 or D41), the depth of each of the columnar air structures is d (H1) and having the following condition is satisfied: 0.1≤d/Dt≤1 (H1/D11=(0.25 to 19)/23=0.01 to 0.83 for figs.1-12 and para.74; H1/D41=(0.25 to 19)/30=0.01 to 0.63 for figs.22-30 and para.112) for the purpose of reducing reflection intensity of non-imaging light/stray light (para.4, 54, 72 and 116).
Accordingly, 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 plate-shaped light blocking element (11 or 41) can be the element 11 or 41 instead of the element 51 with the thickness of the plate-shaped light blocking element is Dt (D11 or D41), the depth of each of the columnar air structures is d (H1) and having the following condition is satisfied: 0.1≤d/Dt≤1 as taught by Figs.1-12 and 22-30 of Tong in the imaging lens assembly module of Figs.31-33 of Tong for the purpose of reducing stray light generated from the reflective element and reducing reflection of stray light inside the holder (para.123).
Regarding claim 2, Figs.1-12 and 22-30 of Tong discloses the thickness of the plate-shaped light blocking element is Dt, the depth of each of the columnar air structures is d, and the following condition is satisfied: 0.3≤d/Dt≤0.95 (H1/D11=(0.25 to 19)/23=0.01 to 0.83 for figs.1-12 and para.74; H1/D41=(0.25 to 19)/30=0.01 to 0.63 for figs.22-30 and para.112) for the purpose of reducing reflection intensity of non-imaging light/stray light (para.4, 54, 72 and 116). The reason for combining is the same as claim 1.
Regarding claim 3, Figs.1-12 and 22-30 of Tong discloses the at least two layered structures comprise at least one cladding layer (two L2 with 116 or 416, or L2) and at least one base layer (L1), a sum of a thickness of one of the at least one cladding layer and a thickness of one of the at least one base layer is Dm, the thickness of the plate-shaped light blocking element is Dt, and the following condition is satisfied: 0.5≤Dm/Dt≤1 (see figs.5 and 24, Dm/Dt=1 or Dm/Dt=2/3) for the purpose of reducing reflection intensity of non-imaging light/stray light (para.4, 54, 72 and 116). The reason for combining is the same as claim 1.
Regarding claim 4, Figs.1-12 and 22-30 of Tong discloses a number of the at least two layered structures of the plate-shaped light blocking element is two (see figs.5 and 24) for the purpose of reducing reflection intensity of non-imaging light/stray light (para.4, 54, 72 and 116). The reason for combining is the same as claim 3.
Regarding claim 5, Figs.1-12 and 22-30 of Tong discloses a diameter of each of the columnar air structures is Dc, and the following condition is satisfied:
0.005 mm≤Dc≤0.021 mm (the diameter is about the same as H1 shown in figs.5 and 24, H1 is 0.25 micrometers to 19 micrometers is 0.00025mm to 0.019mm) for the purpose of reducing reflection intensity of non-imaging light/stray light (para.4, 54, 72 and 116). The reason for combining is the same as claim 3.
Regarding claim 6, Figs.1-12 and 22-30 of Tong discloses the diameter of each of the columnar air structures is Dc, and the following condition is satisfied:
0.007 mm≤Dc≤0.017 mm (the diameter is about the same as H1 shown in figs.5 and 24 and para.54, H1 is 0.25 micrometers to 19 micrometers is 0.00025mm to 0.019mm) for the purpose of reducing reflection intensity of non-imaging light/stray light (para.4, 54, 72 and 116). The reason for combining is the same as claim 5.
Regarding claim 7, Figs.1-12 and 22-30 of Tong discloses a distance between adjacent two of the columnar air structures is Ds, and the following condition is satisfied:
0.01 mm≤Ds≤0.25 mm (Ds is about 8/3 times of H1 shown in figs.5 and 24, H1 is 0.25 micrometers to 19 micrometers, so Ds=0.67 to 50.67 micrometers=0.00067mm to 0.051mm) for the purpose of reducing reflection intensity of non-imaging light/stray light (para.4, 54, 72 and 116). The reason for combining is the same as claim 3.
Regarding claim 8, Figs.1-12 and 22-30 of Tong discloses the distance between the adjacent two of the columnar air structures is Ds, and the following condition is satisfied:
0.01 mm≤Ds≤0.10 mm (Ds is about 8/3 times of H1 shown in figs.5 and 24, H1 is 0.25 micrometers to 19 micrometers, so Ds=0.67 to 50.67 micrometers=0.00067mm to 0.051mm) for the purpose of reducing reflection intensity of non-imaging light/stray light (para.4, 54, 72 and 116). The reason for combining is the same as claim 7.
Regarding claim 9, Figs.1-12 and 22-30 of Tong discloses the depth of each of the columnar air structures is d, and the following condition is satisfied:
0.01 mm≤d≤0.10 mm (d is H1 shown in figs.5 and 24 and para.54, H1 is 0.25 micrometers to 19 micrometers is 0.00025mm to 0.019mm) for the purpose of reducing reflection intensity of non-imaging light/stray light (para.4, 54, 72 and 116). The reason for combining is the same as claim 7.
Regarding claim 10, Figs.1-12 and 22-30 of Tong discloses an area of the surface of the plate-shaped light blocking element is A, an area of a region with the columnar air structures on the surface of the plate-shaped light blocking element is Ad, and the following condition is satisfied: 0.005≤Ad/A≤1 (see figs.3, 5 and 24) for the purpose of reducing reflection intensity of non-imaging light/stray light (para.4, 54, 72 and 116). The reason for combining is the same as claim 3.
Regarding claim 11, Figs.1-12 and 22-30 of Tong discloses the area of the surface of the plate-shaped light blocking element is A, the area of the region with the columnar air structures on the surface of the plate-shaped light blocking element is Ad, and the following condition is satisfied: 0.005≤Ad/A≤0.750 (see figs.3, 5 and 24) for the purpose of reducing reflection intensity of non-imaging light/stray light (para.4, 54, 72 and 116). The reason for combining is the same as claim 10.
Regarding claim 12, Tong discloses the plate-shaped light blocking element further comprises an aperture structure (LPO), the aperture structure is disposed corresponding to the at least one light folding element (see figs.4, 25 and 31 and para.123) for the purpose of reducing reflection intensity of non-imaging light/stray light (para.4, 54, 72 and 116). The reason for combining is the same as claim 1.
Regarding claim 13, Figs.1-12 and 22-30 of Tong discloses the aperture structure comprises a light blocking structure (114), the light blocking structure comprises a plurality of protrusions (CP1), an average maximum height of the light blocking structure is h, and the following condition is satisfied:
0.001 mm≤h≤0.050 mm (para.76, h=about 1/4RVC=1/4*0.05mm=0.0125mm) for the purpose of reducing reflection intensity of non-imaging light/stray light (para.4, 54, 72 and 116). The reason for combining is the same as claim 12.
Regarding claim 14, Tong discloses an assembling portion (56, see figs.31 and 32), the assembling portion disposed corresponding to the surface of the plate-shaped light blocking element (see figs.31 and 32), wherein the assembling portion keeps a predetermined air distance (a zero air distance) between the plate-shaped light blocking element and the at least one light folding element (see figs.31 and 32 and para.123).
Regarding claim 16, Tong discloses the at least one light folding element is a prism (see figs.31-33).
Regarding claim 17, Tong discloses a camera module (5), in at least figs.1-12 and 22-30, 31-33 and 37, comprising: the imaging lens assembly module of claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above); and an image sensor (it’s inherent to have an image sensor disposed on the image surface of the imaging lens assembly module) disposed on an image surface (54) of the imaging lens assembly module.
Regarding claim 18, Tong discloses an electronic device (7), in at least figs.31-12 and 22-30, 31-33 and 37, comprising: the camera module of claim 17 (see rejection of claim 17).
Claim(s) 1-4, 10-12, 14 and 16-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Su CN 218728306U (see document 18732776_2026-07-29_CN_218728306_U_M.pdf and use US 20230370707 as an English translation and citation purpose).
Regarding claim 1, Su discloses an imaging lens assembly module, in at least figs.3A-3L and 5A, comprising: an imaging lens element set (311) having an optical axis (L1) and comprising at least one lens element (fig.3H);
at least one light folding element (320) configured to fold the optical axis at least once, and the at least one light folding element comprising an incident surface, an exit surface and at least one optical reflecting surface (321)(see fig.3H); and
a plate-shaped light blocking element (330) keeping an air distance (a zero air distance) between the plate-shaped light blocking element and the at least one light folding element (see fig.3H), and comprising:
at least two layered structures (see figs.3H and 3I) disposed corresponding to the at least one light folding element (see fig.3H); and
a plurality of columnar air structures (at least the air space between nanostructures of 340), the columnar air structures farther away from the at least one light folding element than a surface of the plate-shaped light blocking element from the at least one light folding element (see fig.3H and 3I), and the surface (the bottom surface of the layer 330) of the plate-shaped light blocking element facing toward the at least one light folding element (see fig.3H);
a thickness of the plate-shaped light blocking element is Dt, a depth of each of the columnar air structures is d (see figs.3H and 3I).
Su does not explicitly disclose the following condition is satisfied: 0.1≤d/Dt≤1.
However, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to modify Su’s imaging lens assembly module to have the 0.1≤d/Dt≤1. One would have chosen the value of d/Dt according to a result effective variable balancing the need to form an imaging lens assembly module with a d/Dt while not making the d/Dt overly large or small to make the imaging lens assembly module unreliable. One would have been motivated to form the imaging lens assembly module to have the d/Dt within the claimed range for the purpose of reducing the reflecting light to maintain the clear image (para.3) in order to have the imaging lens assembly module with high reliability. Also, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been led to have 0.1≤d/Dt≤1 through routine experimentation and optimization, in re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). The Applicant has not disclosed that the range is for a particular unobvious purpose, produce an unexpected/significant result, or are otherwise critical, and it appears prima facie that the process would possess utility using another range. Indeed, it has been held that mere range limitations are prima facie obvious absent a disclosure that the limitations are for a particular unobvious purpose, produce an unexpected result, or are otherwise critical. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have 0.1≤d/Dt≤1 in the imaging lens assembly module of Su for the purpose of reducing the reflecting light to maintain the clear image (para.3).
Regarding claim 2, Su does not explicitly disclose the following condition is satisfied: 0.3≤d/Dt≤0.95. However, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to modify Su’s imaging lens assembly module to have the 0.3≤d/Dt≤0.95. One would have chosen the value of d/Dt according to a result effective variable balancing the need to form an imaging lens assembly module with a d/Dt while not making the d/Dt overly large or small to make the imaging lens assembly module unreliable. One would have been motivated to form the imaging lens assembly module to have the d/Dt within the claimed range for the purpose of reducing the reflecting light to maintain the clear image (para.3) in order to have the imaging lens assembly module with high reliability. Also, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been led to have 0.3≤d/Dt≤0.95 through routine experimentation and optimization, in re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). The Applicant has not disclosed that the range is for a particular unobvious purpose, produce an unexpected/significant result, or are otherwise critical, and it appears prima facie that the process would possess utility using another range. Indeed, it has been held that mere range limitations are prima facie obvious absent a disclosure that the limitations are for a particular unobvious purpose, produce an unexpected result, or are otherwise critical. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have 0.3≤d/Dt≤0.95 in the imaging lens assembly module of Su for the purpose of reducing the reflecting light to maintain the clear image (para.3).
Regarding claim 3, Su discloses the at least two layered structures comprise at least one cladding layer (340) and at least one base layer (331), a sum of a thickness of one of the at least one cladding layer and a thickness of one of the at least one base layer is Dm, the thickness of the plate-shaped light blocking element is Dt, and the following condition is satisfied: 0.5≤Dm/Dt≤1 (see figs.3H and 3I, Dm/Dt=1).
Regarding claim 4, Su discloses a number of the at least two layered structures of the plate-shaped light blocking element is two (see figs.3H and 3I).
Regarding claim 10, Su discloses an area of the surface of the plate-shaped light blocking element is A, an area of a region with the columnar air structures on the surface of the plate-shaped light blocking element is Ad, and the following condition is satisfied: 0.005≤Ad/A≤1 (see figs.3H and 3I).
Regarding claim 11, Su discloses the area of the surface of the plate-shaped light blocking element is A, the area of the region with the columnar air structures on the surface of the plate-shaped light blocking element is Ad, and the following condition is satisfied: 0.005≤Ad/A≤0.750 (see figs.3H and 3I)
Regarding claim 12, Su discloses the plate-shaped light blocking element further comprises an aperture structure (322), the aperture structure is disposed corresponding to the at least one light folding element (see figs.3B and 3H).
Regarding claim 14, Su discloses an assembling portion (32), the assembling portion disposed corresponding to the surface of the plate-shaped light blocking element (see figs.3B, 3E and 3H), wherein the assembling portion keeps a predetermined air distance (a zero air distance) between the plate-shaped light blocking element and the at least one light folding element (see figs.3B, 3E and 3H).
Regarding claim 16, Su discloses the at least one light folding element is a prism (see figs.3B, 3E and 3H).
Regarding claim 17, Su discloses a camera module (30), in at least figs.3A-3L and 5A, comprising: the imaging lens assembly module of claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above); and an image sensor (IS) disposed on an image surface (35) of the imaging lens assembly module.
Regarding claim 18, Su discloses an electronic device (50), in at least figs.3A-3L and 5A, comprising: the camera module of claim 17 (see rejection of claim 17).
Contact Information
The Examiner notes: Figs.1-12 and 22-30 of Tong CN 217484665 U can be used as a secondary reference for the primary reference Su CN 218728306U as well.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JIA X PAN whose telephone number is (571)270-7574. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 11:00AM - 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, Michael H Caley can be reached at (571)272-2286. 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.
/JIA X PAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2871
Prosecution Insights