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 § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 1 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites: “comprising sequentially front lens group, a real lens group, and a stop, from an object side to an image side along a single optical axis” but then recites “wherein the stop is located between the front lens group and the real lens group.” These two statements provide inconsistent optical orders. Thus, claim 1 is indefinite because it recites mutually inconsistent positional relationships for the stop relative to the front and rear lens group, such that it is unclear whether the stop follows the real lens group or is positioned between the front and rear lens group. For examination purpose, Examiner will interpret stop is positioned between the front and rear lens group.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Zhao CN 103869450 (First Embodiment).
Regarding claim 1, Zhao teaches a projection lens (see Title and abstract: LED digital micro-projector projection lens), comprising sequentially a front lens group (see Fig. 1: first lens 10), a rear lens group (Fig. 1: the combination of second lens group 20, surfaces S4-S6 and lens 30, surfaces S7-S8), and a stop (aperture 99), from an object side to an image side along a single optical axis (see Fig. 1), wherein the stop (99) is located between the front lens group (lens 10) and the rear lens group (combination lens 20 and 30); wherein the front lens group has a focal length of f1 satisfying:
40 mm<f11<60 mm (From Table 1: calculated fG1 = 52.59 mm);
the rear lens group has a focal length of f22 satisfying: 2 mm<f22<12 mm (From Table 1: calculated fG2 = 6.12 mm).
Regarding claim 2, Zhao teaches the projection lens according to claim 1, wherein an air space between the front lens group and the stop is set as A11, and a ratio of A11 to a total track length TTL of the projection lens is A11/TTL satisfying:
0.033<A11/TTL<0.167 (From Table 1: A11 = 2.37*0.58 = ~1.374, and TTL = ~ 16.44, thus 1.374/16.44 = ~ 0.083).
Regarding claim 3, Zhao teaches the projection lens according to claim 1, wherein an air space between the stop and the rear lens group is set as A22, and a ratio of A22 to a total track length TTL of the projection lens is A22/TTL satisfying:
0.06<A22/TTL<0.2 (From Table 1: A22 = 2.37*0.42 = ~1, and TTL = ~ 16.44, thus 1/16.44 = ~ 0.061).
Regarding claim 4, Zhao teaches the projection lens according to claim 1, further comprises a turning prism, located on a side of the rear lens group away from the stop, and wherein an air space between the rear lens group and the turning prism is A33, and a ratio of A33 to a total track length TTL of the projection lens is A33/TTL satisfying:
0<A33/TTL<2 (From Table 1: A33 = 2.37/2 = 1.9, and TTL = ~ 16.44, thus 1.9/16.44 = ~ 0.16).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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) 1-4,6, 8, and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamamoto US 2015/0036229 (Example 2) Fig. 7.
Regarding claim 1, Yamamoto teaches a projection lens (see Figs. 1-2: teaches a lens 10 for projection that projects image information, in which the projection lens includes six lenses L1 through L6), comprising sequentially a front lens group (Fig. 7: front lens group L1 and L2), a rear lens group (lenses L3 through L6), and a stop (stop 3), from an object side to an image side along a single optical axis (see Fig. 7), wherein the stop (3) is located between the front lens group (front lens group L1 and L2) and the rear lens group (lenses L3 through L6); wherein the front lens group has a focal length of f11 satisfying: 40 mm<f11<60 mm; the rear lens group has a focal length of f22 satisfying: 2 mm<f22<12 mm (Yamamoto’s Table 3 provides the radii, axial distance, and refractive indices for Example 2. Yamamoto explains that these numerical values are normalized so that the focal length of the entire system is 1 and that the tabulated values have been rounded see para 0109.
From Table 3: calculated effective focal length of the front lens group is f11 ~ 4.6955, and using the rounded Table 3, the calculated focal length of the projection lens is ~ 1.01199, and renormalizing the front group values gives: f11/f = 4.6955/1.01199 = 4.6398. Therefore f 11 = ~4.6398f. Thus, to satisfy the claimed front group range 40 mm<f11<60 mm = 40 mm<4.6398f <60 mm, requires 8.621 < f < 12.932 mm. For example, selecting an overall focal length of f = 10.5 mm, produce f11 = 4.6398*10.5 = 48.72 mm. Thus, 40 mm<48.72 mm <60 mm.
From Table 3: calculated rear group focal length is f22 = 0.8902. Renormalizing relative to the calculated complete focal length of the system = f22/f = 0.8902/1.01199 = ~0.8796. Therefore, f22 = ~0.8796*f. Thus, to satisfy the claimed rear group range 2 mm<f22<12 mm = 2 mm<0.8796*f <12 mm, requires 2.274 < f < 13.642 mm. At the same selected overall focal length of 10.5 mm, f22 = 0.8796*10.5 = 9.24 mm. Thus 2 mm<9.24mm<12 mm). The same physical scale therefore produces both claimed group focal length ranges. Even though, Yamamoto does not expressly disclose the absolute physical scale at which the front lens group has focal length stratifying 40 mm<f11<60 mm and the rear lens group has a focal length f22 satisfying 2 mm<f22<12 mm; however, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to proportionally scale Yamamoto’s normalized Example 2 to an overall focal length appropriated for a compact projection apparatus. Yamamoto expressly presents the numerical values is normalized form, with the focal length of the entire system set to 1, thereby indicating that the disclosed radii and axis distances represent relative dimensions capable of being converted to an appropriated physical sale. Yamamoto further identifies small size and light weight as design objective and described the projection lens as suitable for a palm sized projection apparatus see para 0088). This modification is supported by MPEP sec. 2144.04, subsection IV.A, “changes in size/proportion”, which recognize that a change in size or proportion of prior art subject matter generally involves only ordinary skill where the prior art subject matter is capable of such scaling and the modification does not produce a patentably different operation. See In re Rose, 220 F. 2d 459, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955); In re Rinehart, 531 F.2d 1048, 189 USPQ 143 (CCPA 1976) (“mere scaling up of a prior art process capable of being scaled up, if such were the case, would not establish patentability in a claim to an old process so scaled.” 531 F.2d at 1053, 189 USPQ at 148.). In the present case, proportional scaling would merely multiply Yamamoto’s disclosed radii, lens thicknesses, and air spaces by the same scale factor while retaining the disclosed relative indices, Abbe numbers, lens sequence, stop position, relative surface curvatures, and normalized refractive power distribution. The scaled lens therefore would predictably maintain the same basic optical configuration and operation while changing the absolute focal lengths of the overall lens and its constituent lens groups.
Regarding claim 2, Yamamoto teaches the projection lens according to claim 1, wherein an air space between the front lens group and the stop is set as A11, and a ratio of A11 to a total track length TTL of the projection lens is A11/TTL satisfying: 0.033<A11/TTL<0.167 (Table 3: A11 = 0.23, and TTL = 1.96, A11/TTL = 0.23/1.96 = 0.11735).
Regarding claim 3, Yamamoto teaches the projection lens according to claim 1, wherein an air space between the stop and the rear lens group is set as A22, and a ratio of A22 to a total track length TTL of the projection lens is A22/TTL satisfying: 0.06<A22/TTL<0.2 (Table 3; A22 = 0.2, and TTL = 1.96, A22/TTL = 0.20/1.96 = 0.102).
Regarding claim 4, Yamamoto teaches the projection lens according to claim 1, further comprises a turning prism, located on a side of the rear lens group away from the stop, and wherein an air space between the rear lens group and the turning prism is A33, and a ratio of A33 to a total track length TTL of the projection lens is A33/TTL satisfying: 0<A33/TTL<2 (Table 3: A33 = 0.26, and TTL = 1.96, A33/TTL = 0.26/1.96 = 0.1327).
Regarding claim 6, Yamamoto teaches the projection lens according to claim 1, wherein the front lens group comprises a first lens with a negative focal power and a second lens with a positive focal power (see para 0009, 0052: “a first lens having negative refractive power with its concave surface facing a reduction side, a second lens having positive refractive power”).
Regarding claim 8, Yamamoto teaches the projection lens according to claim 1, wherein the rear lens group comprises a third lens (Fig. 7: L3), a fourth lens (L4), and a fifth lens (L5) a third lens having negative refractive power with its concave surface facing a magnification side, a fourth lens having positive refractive power with its convex surface facing; the reduction side, a fifth lens having positive refractive power arranged in sequence, wherein two adjacent surfaces of the third lens and the fourth lens are glued together (see Fig. 7: L3 and L4 are cemented); and the third lens has a negative focal power, and the fourth lens and the fifth lens have a positive focal power (see para 0009: a third lens having negative refractive power with its concave surface facing a magnification side, a fourth lens having positive refractive power with its convex surface facing; the reduction side, a fifth lens having positive refractive power ).
Regarding claim 10, Yamamoto teaches a projecting device, comprising: a housing; and a projection lens according to claim 1, the projection lens being provided within the housing (see para 0031: teaches mechanical parts such as lens barrel which infers lens barrel as housing to protect the group of lens elements).
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhao CN 103869450.
Regarding claim 10, Zhao teaches a projecting device, however, does not disclose comprising: a housing; and a projection lens according to claim 1, the projection lens being provided within the housing. However, official notice is taken that, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it was old and well known in the projector and optical device art provide a housing around a projection lens assembly. A housing conventionally supports and maintains alignment of the optical components and protect the components from physical contact, dust and environmental exposures. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide Zhao projection lens within a housing in order to mechanically support, align and protect the projection lens. See MPEP 2144.03.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5, 7 and 9 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.
5. The projection lens according to claim 1, wherein the projection lens has a focal length of f satisfying: 3 mm<f<5 mm.
7. The projection lens according to claim 6, wherein the first lens has a focal length of f1 satisfying: −8 mm<f1<−4 mm; and the second lens has a focal length of f2 satisfying: 8 mm<f2<12 mm.
9. The projection lens according to claim 8, wherein the third lens has a focal length of f.sub.3 satisfying: −18 mm<f3<−14 mm; the fourth lens has a focal length of f4 satisfying: 15.5 mm<f4<19.5 mm; the fifth lens has a focal length of f5 satisfying: 7 mm<f5<11 mm.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 2013/0141801, 2012/0075722, 2012/0099210, 2010/0315726, 2009/0316276, 2016/0077332, 20170351068, US Patent 6,124,978, teaches projection lens having front and rear lens groups.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EPHREM ZERU MEBRAHTU whose telephone number is (571)272-8386. The examiner can normally be reached 10 am -6 pm (M-F).
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, Stephone Allen can be reached at 571-272-2434. 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.
/EPHREM Z MEBRAHTU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Prosecution Insights