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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species I (claims 1-19) in the reply filed on 7/17/2026 is acknowledged.
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 (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 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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 10, and 13-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nishiyama et al. (WO 2021/106048). Reference will be made to Nishiyama et al. (U.S. 2022/0350121), which is an equivalent English translation of Nishiyama et al. (WO 2021/106048).
Regarding claim 1, Nishiyama discloses an optical system (100, Fig. 1; page 4, para [0160]) comprising:
a first transmissive reflective surface (311, Fig. 1; page 5, para [0172]);
a second transmissive reflective surface (321, Fig. 1; page 5, para [0170]) located closer to an image (side of 30, Fig. 1; page 4, para [0160]) than the first transmissive reflective surface (311, Fig. 1); and
a lens (310, Fig. 1; page 5, para [0167]) located closer to the image (side of 30, Fig. 1) than the second transmissive reflective surface (321, Fig. 1),
wherein the first transmissive reflective surface (311, Fig. 1) is configured to move in an optical axis (L, Fig. 1; page 6, para [0179]) direction during focusing (Fig. 9A; page 9, para [0214-0215]), and
wherein the lens (310, Fig. 1) is separated from each of the first transmissive reflective surface (since 310 does not contact the first transmissive reflective surface 311, Fig. 1) and the second transmissive reflective surface (321, Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 2, Nishiyama discloses an optical system with all the limitations above and further discloses wherein the lens (310, Fig. 1) is located closest to the object (lens 310 is located closest to the side of 110 relative to 321, Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 10, Nishiyama discloses an optical system with all the limitations above and further discloses wherein a distance between the first transmissive reflective surface (311, Fig. 1) and the second transmissive reflective surface (321, Fig. 1) changes during focusing (Fig. 9A; page 9, para [0214-0215]).
Regarding claim 13, Nishiyama discloses an optical system with all the limitations above and further discloses wherein during focusing, each of the first transmissive reflective surface (311, Fig. 1) and the second transmissive reflective surface (321, Fig. 1) are configured to not rotate by 0.5° or more around an optical axis (since 311 and 321 does not rotate around the optical axis L, Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 14, Nishiyama discloses an optical system with all the limitations above and further discloses wherein the following inequality is satisfied:
0.0 ≤ |θm| ≤ 8.0
wherein θm (°) is the smaller of an open angle of the first transmissive reflective surface (311, Fig. 1) and an open angle of the second transmissive reflective surface (321, Fig. 1; since the open cone angle of 321 defined by light beam L section 2 is 0°; Fig. 10A; page 10, para [0219]).
Regarding claim 15, Nishiyama discloses an optical system with all the limitations above and further discloses wherein at least one of the first transmissive reflective surface (311, Fig. 1) an the second transmissive reflective surface (321, Fig. 1) is provided on a cemented surface of two light transmitting members (since 321 is provided on a cemented surface of a first transmitting element 310 and a second curved light transmitting element between 310 and 320, Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 16, Nishiyama discloses an optical system with all the limitations above and further discloses wherein at least one of the first transmissive reflective surface (311, Fig. 1) and the second transmissive reflective surface (321, Fig. 1) is spherical (such as 311 having a spherical curved surface as a descriptor as broadly interpreted and not a specific lens type such as a spherical lens, Fig. 1; page 6, para [0175]).
Regarding claim 17, Nishiyama discloses an optical system with all the limitations above and further discloses an image stabilizing unit (since 200 compensates for wavelength dispersion and chromatic aberration, Fig. 1; page 5, para [0162-0163]) disposed on an object side (side of 110, Fig. 1) of the first transmissive reflective surface (311, Fig. 1).
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) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishiyama et al. (WO 2021/106048) in view of Okuda (U.S. 2014/0118608). Reference will be made to Nishiyama et al. (U.S. 2022/0350121), which is an equivalent English translation of Nishiyama et al. (WO 2021/106048).
Regarding claim 19, Nishiyama discloses an image pickup apparatus (410, Fig. 1; page 6, para [0177]) comprising:
an optical system (100, Fig. 1; page 4, para [0160]), wherein the optical system includes:
a first transmissive reflective surface (311, Fig. 1; page 5, para [0172]);
a second transmissive reflective surface (321, Fig. 1; page 5, para [0170]) located closer to an image (side of 30, Fig. 1; page 4, para [0160]) than the first transmissive reflective surface (311, Fig. 1); and
a lens (310, Fig. 1; page 5, para [0167]) located closer to the image (side of 30, Fig. 1) than the second transmissive reflective surface (321, Fig. 1),
wherein the first transmissive reflective surface (311, Fig. 1) is configured to move in an optical axis (L, Fig. 1; page 6, para [0179]) direction during focusing (Fig. 9A; page 9, para [0214-0215]), and
wherein the lens (310, Fig. 1) is separated from each of the first transmissive reflective surface (since 310 does not contact the first transmissive reflective surface 311, Fig. 1) and the second transmissive reflective surface (321, Fig. 1).
Nishiyama does not expressly disclose an image sensor. However, Okuda discloses an image pickup apparatus (Fig. 2; page 1, para [0018]) comprising an image sensor (6, Fig. 2; page 1, para [0018]) disposed adjacent to a display panel (9, Fig. 2; page 2, para [0022]) of an optical system (optical system of 1, Fig. 2; page 1, para [0018]) in order to perform a photoelectric conversion of an object image to output an image pickup signal (page 2, para [0021]).
Therefore, before the time of the effective filing of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to configure the image pickup apparatus (Nishiyama: 410, Fig. 1) of Nishiyama with the image sensor (Okuda: 6, Fig. 2) of Okuda such that the image sensor (Okuda: 6, Fig. 2) is disposed adjacent to a display panel (Nishiyama: 110, Fig. 1; page 5, para [0161]) in order to obtain the benefits of performing a photoelectric conversion of an object image to output an image pickup signal as taught by Okuda (Fig. 2; page 2, para [0021]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-9, 11-12, and 18 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art as presently searched does not disclose the optical system of claim 3 (having all the combination of features including wherein the following inequality is satisfied: -1.00 ≤ φfr/φtotal ≤ 0.42 where φfr is refractive power of a portion of the optical system on an object side of the first transmissive reflective surface, and φtotal is power of the optical system), does not disclose the optical system of claim 4 (having all the combination of features including wherein in a case where an on-axis marginal ray is reflected by the second transmissive reflective surface, the following inequality is satisfied: 0.15 ≤ Hm2/f ≤ 3.00 where Hm2 is a distance from an optical axis to a reflection point in a direction perpendicular to the optical axis, and f is a focal length of the optical system), does not disclose the optical system of claim 5 (having all the combination of features including wherein the following inequality is satisfied: 0.0 ≤ dpupil/f ≤ 2.0 where dpupil is a distance from a surface closest to an object of the optical system to an entrance pupil of the optical system, and f is a focal length of the optical system), does not disclose the optical system of claim 6 (having all the combination of features including wherein the following inequality is satisfied: 0.6 ≤ Pm1/Ppupil ≤ 2.0 where Pm1 is an effective diameter of the first transmissive reflective surface, and Ppupil is an entrance pupil diameter of the optical system), does not disclose the optical system of claim 7 (having all the combination of features including wherein the following inequality is satisfied: 0.5 ≤ Fno ≤ 2.5 where Fno is an F-number of the optical system), does not disclose the optical system of claim 8 (having all the combination of features including a lens that is disposed on an object side of the first transmissive reflective surface, separated from the first transmissive reflective surface, and configured to move integrally with the first transmissive reflective surface during focusing, wherein the following inequality is satisfied: -1.00 ≤ φb/φtotal ≤ 0.70 where φb is refractive power of a portion of the optical system on an object side of a lens unit that moves integrally with the first transmissive reflective surface during focusing, and φtotal is power of the optical system), does not disclose the optical system of claim 9 (having all the combination of features including wherein the following inequality is satisfied: 0.005 ≤ |Δdf|/f/Fno ≤ 1.000 where |Δdf| is a moving amount during focusing from infinity to a distance corresponding to 10 times a focal length of the optical system, f is a focal length of the optical system, and Fno is an F-number of the optical system), does not disclose the optical system of claim 11 (having all the combination of features including an aperture stop configured to move integrally with the first transmissive reflective surface in the optical axis direction during focusing), does not disclose the optical system of claim 12 (having all the combination of features including a lens disposed outside an area between the first transmissive reflective surface and the second transmissive reflective surface, and configured to move in the optical axis direction during focusing), and does not disclose the optical system of claim 18 (having all the combination of features including herein the following inequality is satisfied: 0.6 ≤ β ≤ 1.5 where β is a lateral magnification of a unit disposed on an image side of the second transmissive reflective surface).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAUL CHANG LEE whose telephone number is (571)270-7923. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10am-6pm.
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.
/PAUL C LEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2871
Prosecution Insights