CTNF 18/763,420 CTNF 95429 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 07/03/2024 was filed and is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. Double Patenting 08-33 AIA 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 § 2146 et seq. 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 filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13. The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual 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/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer. 08-34 AIA Claim s 17 and 19 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12,061,325 . Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because of the similarities between the Patent and the application as follows: US Patent 12,061,325 Application 18/763,420 Claim 1: A variable magnification optical system comprising, in order from an object side, a first lens group having negative refractive power, a first intermediate lens group having positive refractive power, a second intermediate lens group having negative refractive power and a rear lens group ; upon varying a magnification from a wide angle end state to a telephoto end state, a distance between said first lens group and said first intermediate lens group being varied, a distance between said first intermediate lens group and said second intermediate lens group being varied, and a distance between said second intermediate lens group and said rear lens group being varied ; wherein said first intermediate lens group comprises at least two lenses having negative refractive power; said first intermediate lens group consisting of, in order from the object side, a second lens group having positive refractive power and a third lens group having positive refractive power ; said third lens group having only one lens component; upon varying the magnification, a distance between said second lens group and said third lens group being varied; and upon varying the magnification, said rear lens group being moved along an optical axis, wherein the variable magnification optical system has at least one focusing lens group which is moved upon carrying out focusing from a wide angle end state to a telephoto end state for an infinite distance object , and the following conditional expressions being satisfied: 0.5 < f1/fM2 < 1.05 0.7 < |fF|/ft < 3.30 38.00° < ωw < 85.00° 0.60 < f1N/f1 < 2.00 where f1 denotes a focal length of said first lens group, fM2 denotes a focal length of said second intermediate lens group , fF denotes a focal length of a focusing lens group having a strongest refractive power in the at least one focusing lens group, ft denotes a focal length of the variable magnification optical system in the telephoto end state , and ωw denotes a half angle of view of the variable magnification optical system in the wide angle end state, and f1N denotes a focal length of a lens having a strongest negative refractive power in the first lens group. Claim 17 and 19: A variable magnification optical system comprising a plurality of lens groups; upon varying a magnification, distances between the neighboring respective lens groups in the plurality of lens groups being varied ; the plurality of lens groups comprising, in order from an object side, a first lens group having negative refractive power, a first intermediate lens group consisting of one or two lens groups having positive refractive power , a second intermediate lens group consisting of one lens group having negative refractive power and a rear lens group comprising at least one lens group ; and the following conditional expressions being satisfied: 0.050 < fl / fM2 < 1.050 0.60 < f1N / fl< 2.00 38.00°<ωw < 85.00° where f1 denotes a focal length of the first lens group, fM2 denotes a focal length of the second intermediate lens group, f1N denotes a focal length of a lens having a strongest negative refractive power in the first lens group, and ow denotes a half angle of view of the variable magnification optical system in the wide-angle end state. Claim 19: A variable magnification optical system according to claim 17, wherein at least one lens group of the plurality of lens groups is moved upon carrying out focusing from an infinite distance object to a close distance object, and the following conditional expression is satisfied: 0.70 <|fF| / ft < 3.30 where fF denotes a focal length of a lens group having a strongest refractive power in lens groups that move upon carrying out focusing, and ft denotes a focal length of the variable magnification optical system in the telephoto end state . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-12-aia AIA (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. 07-15 AIA Claim s 17-19, 23-28, and 31-32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1 ) as being disclosed by Yoneyama (US 2004/0156120, of record) . Regarding claim 17, Yoneyama discloses a variable magnification optical system (see Fig 1) comprising a plurality of lens groups; upon varying a magnification, distances between the neighboring respective lens groups in the plurality of lens groups being varied (see Fig 1; see Table 1; distances between separate Groups 1-5 vary; specifically distances d9, d12, d17, and d20); the plurality of lens groups comprising, in order from an object side, a first lens group having negative refractive power (see Fig 1, Table 1, focal distance of Unit 1 is -24.7813 calculated from radii of curvature and refractive indices), a first intermediate lens group consisting of one or two lens groups having positive refractive power (see Fig 1, Table 1, focal distance of combined Units 2 and 3 is 33.18116 calculated from radii of curvature and refractive indices; a first intermediate lens group may also be interpreted as only Unit 3 whose power is also positive), a second intermediate lens group consisting of one lens group having negative refractive power (see Fig 1, Table 1, focal distance of Unit 4 is -63.3057) and a rear lens group comprising at least one lens group (see Fig 1; Table 1; Unit 5 is acting as a rear lens group); and the following conditional expressions being satisfied: 0.050 < f1/fM2 < 1.050 (see Fig 1; see Table 1; Unit 1/Unit 4 = - 24.7813/ -63.3057 = 0.3915) 0.60 < f1N/f1 < 2.00 (see Fig 1; Table 1; F1N = -35.8173, F1 = -24.7813, -35.8173/24.7813 = 1.4453; values calculated from radii of curvature and refractive indices) 38.00˚<ωw < 85.00° (see Fig 1; see Table 1; half angle at wide angle state is 50.8 deg) where f1 denotes a focal length of said first lens group, fM2 denotes a focal length of said second intermediate lens group, f1N denotes a focal length of a lens having a strongest negative refractive power in the first lens group, and ωw denotes a half angle of view of the variable magnification optical system in the wide angle end state. Regarding claim 18, Yoneyama discloses a variable magnification optical system according to claim 17 (see Fig 1), wherein the first intermediate lens group consists of two lens groups having positive refractive power (see Fig 1; Table 1; Groups 2 and 3 are positive lens groups calculated from sum of values in Table 1 for each group), each of the two lens groups of the first intermediate lens group comprises a cemented lens constructed by a negative lens cemented with a positive lens (see Fig 1; Table 1; Groups 2 and 3 both comprise lenses cemented together, lenses 21 and 22 in Group 2 and Lens 32 and 33 in Group 3), and the rear lens group comprises at least one lens group having negative refractive power and at least one lens group having positive refractive power (see Fig 1; Table 1; Lens Group 5 has a negative third lens 53 that is has a focal length of -115.68 and a positive first lens 51 that has a focal length of +41.26, calculated from values in Table 1). Regarding claim 19, Yoneyama discloses a variable magnification optical system according to claim 17 (see Fig 1), wherein at least one lens group of the plurality of lens groups is moved upon carrying out focusing from an infinite distance object to a close distance object, and the following conditional expression is satisfied: 0.70 < |fF|/ft < 3.30 where fF denotes a focal length of a lens group having a strongest refractive power in lens groups that move upon carrying out focusing, and ft denotes a focal length of the variable magnification optical system in the telephoto end state (see Fig 1; see Table 1; Focal length Unit 4/ Telephoto Focal length = 63.3057 / 53.35 = 1.187). Regarding claim 23, Yoneyama discloses a variable magnification optical system according to claim 17 (see Fig 1), wherein at least one lens group of the plurality of lens groups is moved upon carrying out focusing from an infinite distance object to a close distance object (see Fig 1; Table 1; Para [0112-0121]; All lens groups are moved upon switching from a short focal length to a long focal length), and the at least one lens group that moves upon carrying out focusing is composed of one or two lenses (see Fig 1; Table 1; Para [0112-0121]; the second intermediate lens group/Unit 4 may comprises two lenses as seen in Fig 1). Regarding claim 24, Yoneyama discloses a variable magnification optical system according to claim 17 (see Fig 1), wherein the first intermediate lens group comprises at least two lenses having negative refractive power (see Fig 1; Table 1; Unit 2 and 3 have two negative lenses 22 and 33 with focal lengths -43.7 and -36.1 respectively). Regarding claim 25, Yoneyama discloses a variable magnification optical system according to claim 17 (see Fig 1), wherein the first lens group is composed of two lens components (see Fig 1; Table 1; Unit 1 may be understood to be only the first two lens of the lens group). Regarding claim 26, Yoneyama discloses a variable magnification optical system according to claim 17 (see Fig 1), wherein at least one lens group of the plurality of lens groups is moved upon carrying out focusing from an infinite distance object to a close distance object (see Fig 1; Table 1; Para [0112-0121]; All lens groups are moved upon switching from a short focal length to a long focal length), and the variable magnification optical system comprises at least one lens group at an image side of the most image side lens group in the at least one lens group that moves upon carrying out focusing (see Fig 1; Table 1; Para [0112-0121]; the system includes a fifth lens unit which is the most image side lens group that also moves from a short focal length state to a long focal length state). Regarding claim 27, Yoneyama discloses a variable magnification optical system according to claim 17 (see Fig 1), wherein at least one lens group of the plurality of lens groups is moved upon carrying out focusing from an infinite distance object to a close distance object, and at least one of the at least one lens group that moves upon carrying out focusing has positive refractive power (see Fig 1; Table 1; Para [0112-0121]; All lens groups are moved upon switching from a short focal length to a long focal length; Lens groups 2, 3, and 5 all have positive refractive power). Regarding claim 28, Yoneyama discloses a variable magnification optical system according to claim 17 (see Fig 1), wherein at least one lens group of the plurality of lens groups is moved upon carrying out focusing from an infinite distance object to a close distance object (see Fig 1; see Table 1; Para [0112-0121]; all lens groups are moved when focusing from a long focal length to a short focal length as seen in Fig 1), and the rear lens group comprises at least two lens groups that move upon carrying out focusing (see Fig 1; see Table 1; Para [0112-0121]; lenses in Group 5 may divided into two groups comprising a first group with lens 51 and a second group with lenses 52 and 53; Both divided groups may move with focusing from long focal length to short focal length). Regarding claim 31, Yoneyama discloses an optical apparatus comprising a variable magnification optical system according to claim 17 (see Fig 1; Table 1; Para [0060]; the optical apparatus is a wide angle zoom lens). Regarding claim 32, Yoneyama discloses a method for manufacturing a variable magnification optical system (see Fig 1) which comprises a plurality of lens groups; constructing such that, upon varying a magnification, distances between the neighboring respective lens groups in the plurality of lens groups are varied (see Fig 1; see Table 1; distances between separate Groups 1-5 vary; specifically distances d9, d12, d17, and d20); constructing such that the plurality of lens groups comprises, in order from an object side, a first lens group having negative refractive power (see Fig 1, Table 1, focal distance of Unit 1 is -24.7813 calculated from radii of curvature and refractive indices), a first intermediate lens group consisting of one or two lens groups having positive refractive power (see Fig 1, Table 1, focal distance of combined Units 2 and 3 is 33.18116 calculated from radii of curvature and refractive indices; a first intermediate lens group may also be interpreted as only Unit 3 whose power is also positive), a second intermediate lens group consisting of one lens group having negative refractive power (see Fig 1, Table 1, focal distance of Unit 4 is -63.3057) and a rear lens group comprising at least one lens group (see Fig 1; Table 1; Unit 5 is acting as a rear lens group); and constructing such that the following conditional expressions are satisfied: 0.050 < fl / fM2 < 1.050 (see Fig 1; see Table 1; Unit 1/Unit 4 = - 24.7813/ -63.3057 = 0.3915); 0.60 < f1N / f1 < 2.00 (see Fig 1; Table 1; F1N = -35.8173, F1 = -24.7813, -35.8173/24.7813 = 1.4453; values calculated from radii of curvature and refractive indices); 38.00°<ωw < 85.00° (see Fig 1; see Table 1; half angle at wide angle state is 50.8 deg) where f1 denotes a focal length of the first lens group, fM2 denotes a focal length of the second intermediate lens group, flN denotes a focal length of a lens having a strongest negative refractive power in the first lens group, and ωw denotes a half angle of view of the variable magnification optical system in the wide angle end state . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 20-22, and 29-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoneyama (US 2004/015-6120, of record) . Regarding claim 20, Yoneyama discloses a variable magnification optical system according to claim 17 (see Fig 1). Yoneyama does not disclose wherein the following conditional expression is satisfied: 2.00 < D1Mw / fw < 4.00 where D1Mw denotes a distance along the optical axis between the first lens group and the first intermediate lens group in the wide angle end state, and fw denotes a focal length of the variable magnification optical system in the wide angle end state. Optimizing the focal length of the movable unit, fw, is well within the bounds of normal experimentation. See MPEP 2144.05 II (A). “[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.” In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). Furthermore, “[a] particular parameter must first be recognized as a result- effective variable, i.e., a variable which achieves a recognized result, before the determination of the optimum or workable ranges of said variable might be characterized as routine experimentation.” In re Antonie, 559 F.2d 618, 195 USPQ 6 (CCPA 1977). In the case at hand, Gross teaches bending a lens (Pg. 5-6), thereby modifying the radius of curvature of a first lens of the lens system as a variable which achieves a recognized result. Therefore, the prior art teaches adjusting a focal length of the movable unit by adjusting a radius of curvature of any of the lenses and identifies said ratio as result-effective variable. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective time of filing to modify Yoneyama with wherein the following conditional expression is satisfied: 2.00 < D1Mw / fw < 4.00 where D1Mw denotes a distance along the optical axis between the first lens group and the first intermediate lens group in the wide angle end state, and fw denotes a focal length of the variable magnification optical system in the wide angle end state since it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. Regarding claim 21, Yoneyama discloses a variable magnification optical system according to claim 17 (see Fig 1). Yoneyama does not disclose wherein the following conditional expression is satisfied: 2.00 < vM1P / vM1N < 3.00 where vM1P denotes an Abbe's number of a lens having a strongest positive refractive power in the first intermediate lens group, and vM1N denotes an Abbe's number of a lens having a strongest negative refractive power in the first intermediate lens group. Optimizing the abbe number of a lens having a strongest positive refractive power in the first intermediate lens group, is well within the bounds of normal experimentation. See MPEP 2144.05 II (A). “[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.” In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). Furthermore, “[a] particular parameter must first be recognized as a result- effective variable, i.e., a variable which achieves a recognized result, before the determination of the optimum or workable ranges of said variable might be characterized as routine experimentation.” In re Antonie, 559 F.2d 618, 195 USPQ 6 (CCPA 1977). In the case at hand, Gross teaches changing a refractive index of a critical lens together with varying the glass material (Pg. 4-5), thereby modifying Abbe number of the lens as a variable which achieves a recognized result. Therefore, the prior art teaches adjusting an abbe number of a lens by adjusting the material of the lens and identifies said ratio as result-effective variable. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective time of filing to modify Yoneyama with wherein the following conditional expression is satisfied: 2.00 < vM1P / vM1N < 3.00 where vM1P denotes an Abbe's number of a lens having a strongest positive refractive power in the first intermediate lens group, and vM1N denotes an Abbe's number of a lens having a strongest negative refractive power in the first intermediate lens group since it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. Regarding claim 22, Yoneyama discloses a variable magnification optical system according to claim 17 (see Fig 1). Yoneyama does not disclose wherein the following conditional expression is satisfied: 0.20 < fM1P / fM1N < 0.80 where fM1P denotes a focal length of a lens having a strongest positive refractive power in the first intermediate lens group, and fM1N denotes a focal length of a lens having a strongest negative refractive power in the first intermediate lens group. Optimizing the focal length of the strongest positive refractive power in the first intermediate lens group, fM1P, is well within the bounds of normal experimentation. See MPEP 2144.05 II (A). “[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.” In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). Furthermore, “[a] particular parameter must first be recognized as a result- effective variable, i.e., a variable which achieves a recognized result, before the determination of the optimum or workable ranges of said variable might be characterized as routine experimentation.” In re Antonie, 559 F.2d 618, 195 USPQ 6 (CCPA 1977). In the case at hand, Gross teaches bending a lens (Pg. 5-6), thereby modifying the radius of curvature of a lens of the lens system as a variable which achieves a recognized result. Therefore, the prior art teaches adjusting a focal length of the strongest positive refractive power in the first intermediate lens group and identifies said ratio as result-effective variable. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective time of filing to modify Yoneyama with wherein the following conditional expression is satisfied: 0.20 < fM1P / fM1N < 0.80 where fM1P denotes a focal length of a lens having a strongest positive refractive power in the first intermediate lens group, and fM1N denotes a focal length of a lens having a strongest negative refractive power in the first intermediate lens group since it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. Regarding claim 29, Yoneyama discloses a variable magnification optical system according to claim 18 (see Fig 1). Yoneyama does not disclose wherein the second intermediate lens group comprises a negative lens at the most object side. Optimizing the position of a negative lens in a second intermediate lens group, is well within the bounds of normal experimentation. See MPEP 2144.05 II (A). “[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.” In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). Furthermore, “[a] particular parameter must first be recognized as a result- effective variable, i.e., a variable which achieves a recognized result, before the determination of the optimum or workable ranges of said variable might be characterized as routine experimentation.” In re Antonie, 559 F.2d 618, 195 USPQ 6 (CCPA 1977). In the case at hand, Gross teaches reversing the order of a cemented doublet (Pg. 4), thereby modifying position of the negative lens as a variable which achieves a recognized result. Therefore, the prior art teaches reversing the position of the negative lens of the second intermediate lens group and identifies said position as result-effective variable. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective time of filing to modify Yoneyama with wherein the second intermediate lens group comprises a negative lens at the most object side since it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. Regarding claim 30, Yoneyama discloses a variable magnification optical system according to claim 17 (see Fig 1). Yoneyama does not disclose wherein the following conditional expression is satisfied: 0.10 < BFw / fw < 1.00 where BFw denotes a back focus of the variable magnification optical system in the wide angle end state, and fw denotes a focal length of the variable magnification optical system in the wide angle end state. Optimizing the focal length of the movable unit, fw, is well within the bounds of normal experimentation. See MPEP 2144.05 II (A). “[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.” In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). Furthermore, “[a] particular parameter must first be recognized as a result- effective variable, i.e., a variable which achieves a recognized result, before the determination of the optimum or workable ranges of said variable might be characterized as routine experimentation.” In re Antonie, 559 F.2d 618, 195 USPQ 6 (CCPA 1977). In the case at hand, Gross teaches bending a lens (Pg. 5-6), thereby modifying the radius of curvature of a first lens of the lens system as a variable which achieves a recognized result. Therefore, the prior art teaches adjusting a focal length of the movable unit by adjusting a radius of curvature of any of the lenses and identifies said ratio as result-effective variable. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective time of filing to modify Yoneyama with wherein the following conditional expression is satisfied: 0.10 < BFw / fw < 1.00 where BFw denotes a back focus of the variable magnification optical system in the wide angle end state, and fw denotes a focal length of the variable magnification optical system in the wide angle end state since it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GABRIEL ANDRES SANZ whose telephone number is (571)272-3844. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30 am -5:30 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, 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 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. /G.A.S./Examiner, Art Unit 2872 /WILLIAM R ALEXANDER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872 Application/Control Number: 18/763,420 Page 2 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 18/763,420 Page 3 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 18/763,420 Page 4 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 18/763,420 Page 5 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 18/763,420 Page 6 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 18/763,420 Page 7 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 18/763,420 Page 8 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 18/763,420 Page 9 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 18/763,420 Page 10 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 18/763,420 Page 11 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 18/763,420 Page 12 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 18/763,420 Page 13 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 18/763,420 Page 14 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 18/763,420 Page 15 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 18/763,420 Page 16 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 18/763,420 Page 17 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 18/763,420 Page 18 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 18/763,420 Page 19 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 18/763,420 Page 20 Art Unit: 2872
Prosecution Insights