DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
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.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species B (figure 8), including claims 1-20, in the reply filed on 07/23/2026 is acknowledged.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
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.
Claims 1-6, 8-10, 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yamada (EP 3029504).
Regarding claim 1, Yamada (figure 1) discloses an optical lens, comprising:
a first lens group and a second lens group that are arranged from an object side to an image side, wherein the first lens group has positive focal power, the second lens group has negative focal power, and the first lens group or the second lens group is focusing a focusing lens group (Gr1 and Gr2; figure 1);
wherein the first lens group and the second lens group are configured such that in a focusing process in which the optical lens switches from a long shot to a close-up shot, a spacing between the first lens group and the second lens group increases, an effective focal length of the optical lens decreases (For focusing, the second lens group Gr2 moves along the optical axis AX. That is, the second lens group Gr2 is a focusing group, and for focusing on an object at a close distance, it moves toward the image side (i.e., toward the image sensor SR) as indicated by arrow mF; see at least paragraph 0035), and the optical lens satisfies the following relational expression:
F2/EFL > −5 (-54.56/34.4 = -1.58; see at least paragraph 0070),
wherein F2 is a focal length of the second lens group, and EFL is the effective focal length of the optical lens; and
wherein the first lens group and the second lens group are configured such that in the focusing process in which the optical lens switches from the long shot to the close-up shot, the first lens group moves toward the object side along an optical axis or the second lens group moves toward the image side along the optical axis (For focusing, the second lens group Gr2 moves along the optical axis AX. That is, the second lens group Gr2 is a focusing group, and for focusing on an object at a close distance, it moves toward the image side (i.e., toward the image sensor SR) as indicated by arrow mF; see at least paragraph 0035).
Regarding claim 2, Yamada (figure 1) discloses wherein the optical lens satisfies the following relational expression: 0.5 ≤ TTL/EFL ≤ 5 (95/34.4 = 3.76; see at least paragraph 0070), wherein TTL is a distance from an object-side surface of a first lens in the first lens group to an imaging plane on the optical axis when the optical lens is in a working state.
Regarding claim 3, Yamada (figure 1) discloses wherein the optical lens satisfies the following relational expression: F1/EFL ≤ 5 (43.56/34.4 = 1.266; see at least paragraph 0070), wherein F1 is a focal length of the first lens group.
Regarding claim 4, Yamada (figure 1) discloses wherein the first lens group comprises at least two lenses, and the at least two lenses have different Abbe numbers (see at least paragraph 0056).
Regarding claim 5, Yamada (figure 1) discloses wherein the first lens group comprises a first lens, a second lens, and a third lens that are arranged from the object side to the image side, the first lens has positive focal power, the second lens has negative focal power, and the third lens has positive focal power (L11-L17; see at least paragraph 0037).
Regarding claim 6, Yamada (figure 1) discloses wherein the first lens group comprises a first lens, and the optical lens satisfies the following relational expression: Vd1 ≥ 18, wherein Vd1 is an Abbe number of the first lens (19.88; see at least paragraph 0056).
Regarding claim 8, Yamada (figure 1) discloses wherein the first lens group comprises a first lens, and a near-optical-axis region on an object-side surface of the first lens has a convex surface (L11).
Regarding claim 9, Yamada (figure 1) discloses wherein the optical lens satisfies the following relational expression: 1 mm ≤ φ1 ≤ 30 mm, wherein φ1 is a diameter of a maximum effective region of the first lens group (16.012 mm; see at least paragraph 0056).
Regarding claim 10, Yamada (figure 1) discloses wherein the optical lens satisfies the following relational expression: 1 mm ≤ φ2 ≤ 30 mm, wherein φ2 is a diameter of a maximum effective region of the second lens group (10.592 mm; see at least paragraph 0056).
Regarding claim 14, Yamada (figure 1) discloses wherein the optical lens satisfies the following relational expression: 0.5 ≤ Fno ≤ 8, wherein Fno is an f-number of the optical lens (1.44; see at least paragraph 0058).
Regarding claim 15, Yamada (figure 1) discloses wherein the optical lens comprises a third lens group, the third lens group is located on an image side of the second lens group, and the third lens group has optical power (Gr3).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 7, 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamada (EP 3029504) in view of Lee et al. (US 2006/0164732).
Regarding claim 7, Yamada discloses the limitations as shown in the rejection of claim 1 above. However, Yamada is silent regarding wherein at least one lens in the first lens group is made of glass. Lee et al. (figure 1) teaches wherein at least one lens in the first lens group is made of glass (L1; see at least paragraphs 0037 and 0041). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the lens as taught by Lee et al. in order to achieve an inner-focus type zoom lens system capable of achieving a sufficient zooming performance by moving only one lens group.
Regarding claim 17, Yamada discloses the limitations as shown in the rejection of claim 15 above. However, Yamada is silent regarding wherein at least one lens in the first lens group is made of glass. Lee et al. (figure 1) teaches wherein an optical surface of at least one lens in the third lens group is an aspheric surface (L6). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the lens as taught by Lee et al. in order to correct for aberrations and provide a large field of view and aperture.
Regarding claim 18, Lee et al. (figure 1) teaches wherein the optical lens comprises a liquid lens or a liquid crystal lens, and the liquid lens or the liquid crystal lens is located in the first lens group (L1; see at least paragraphs 0037 and 0041).
Regarding claim 19, Yamada (figure 1) discloses a device, comprising:
a first lens group and a second lens group that are arranged from an object side to an image side,
wherein the first lens group has positive focal power, the second lens group has negative focal power, or the second lens group is a focusing lens group (Gr1 and Gr2; figure 1);
wherein the first lens group and the second lens group are configured such that in a focusing process in which the optical lens switches from a long shot to a close-up shot, a spacing between the first lens group and the second lens group increases, an effective focal length of the optical lens decreases (For focusing, the second lens group Gr2 moves along the optical axis AX. That is, the second lens group Gr2 is a focusing group, and for focusing on an object at a close distance, it moves toward the image side (i.e., toward the image sensor SR) as indicated by arrow mF; see at least paragraph 0035), and the optical lens satisfies the following relational expression:
F2/EFL > −5 (-54.56/34.4 = -1.58; see at least paragraph 0070),
wherein F2 is a focal length of the second lens group, and EFL is the effective focal length of the optical lens; and
wherein the first lens group and the second lens group are configured such that in the focusing process in which the optical lens switches from the long shot to the close-up shot, the first lens group moves toward the object side along an optical axis or the second lens group moves toward the image side along the optical axis (For focusing, the second lens group Gr2 moves along the optical axis AX. That is, the second lens group Gr2 is a focusing group, and for focusing on an object at a close distance, it moves toward the image side (i.e., toward the image sensor SR) as indicated by arrow mF; see at least paragraph 0035).
Yamada discloses the limitations as shown in the rejection of claim 19 above. However, Yamada is silent regarding a photosensitive element and wherein the photosensitive element is located on the image side of the optical lens. Lee et al. (figure 1) teaches a photosensitive element and wherein the photosensitive element is located on the image side of the optical lens (15; see at least paragraph 0080). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the electronic device as taught by Lee et al. in order to achieve an inner-focus type zoom lens system capable of achieving a sufficient zooming performance by moving only one lens group.
Regarding claim 20, Yamada (figure 1) discloses a device, comprising:
a first lens group and a second lens group that are arranged from an object side to an image side,
wherein the first lens group has positive focal power, the second lens group has negative focal power, or the second lens group is a focusing lens group (Gr1 and Gr2; figure 1);
wherein the first lens group and the second lens group are configured such that in a focusing process in which the optical lens switches from a long shot to a close-up shot, a spacing between the first lens group and the second lens group increases, an effective focal length of the optical lens decreases (For focusing, the second lens group Gr2 moves along the optical axis AX. That is, the second lens group Gr2 is a focusing group, and for focusing on an object at a close distance, it moves toward the image side (i.e., toward the image sensor SR) as indicated by arrow mF; see at least paragraph 0035), and the optical lens satisfies the following relational expression:
F2/EFL > −5 (-54.56/34.4 = -1.58; see at least paragraph 0070),
wherein F2 is a focal length of the second lens group, and EFL is the effective focal length of the optical lens; and
wherein the first lens group and the second lens group are configured such that in the focusing process in which the optical lens switches from the long shot to the close-up shot, the first lens group moves toward the object side along an optical axis or the second lens group moves toward the image side along the optical axis (For focusing, the second lens group Gr2 moves along the optical axis AX. That is, the second lens group Gr2 is a focusing group, and for focusing on an object at a close distance, it moves toward the image side (i.e., toward the image sensor SR) as indicated by arrow mF; see at least paragraph 0035).
Yamada discloses the limitations as shown in the rejection of claim 20 above. However, Yamada is silent regarding an image processor; a photosensitive element and wherein the photosensitive element is located on the image side of the optical lens. Lee et al. (figure 1) teaches an image processor (see at least paragraph 0034); a photosensitive element and wherein the photosensitive element is located on the image side of the optical lens (15; see at least paragraph 0080). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the electronic device as taught by Lee et al. in order to achieve an inner-focus type zoom lens system capable of achieving a sufficient zooming performance by moving only one lens group.
Claims 11-13 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamada (EP 3029504).
Regarding claim 11, Yamada discloses the claimed invention except for wherein the optical lens satisfies the following relational expression: 0.3 mm ≤ h1 ≤ 50 mm, wherein h1 is a maximum pop-up height of the first lens group. 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 mm ≤ h1 ≤ 50 mm, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim, including are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art, In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233 (C.C.P.A. 1955).
Regarding claim 12, Yamada discloses the claimed invention except for wherein the optical lens satisfies the following relational expression: 0.3 mm ≤ h2 ≤ 50 mm, wherein h2 is a maximum pop-up height of the second lens group. 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 mm ≤ h2 ≤ 50 mm, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim, including are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art, In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233 (C.C.P.A. 1955).
Regarding claim 13, Yamada discloses the claimed invention except for wherein the optical lens comprises a variable aperture, and the variable aperture is configured to decreases in size during the focusing process in which the optical lens switches from the long shot to the close-up shot. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to wherein the optical lens comprises a variable aperture, and the variable aperture is configured to decreases in size during the focusing process in which the optical lens switches from the long shot to the close-up shot, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim, including are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art, In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233 (C.C.P.A. 1955). In addition, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the electronic device make the lens significantly lighter, smaller, and more budget-friendly to manufacture than a constant aperture lens.
Regarding claim 16, Yamada discloses the claimed invention except for wherein the optical lens satisfies the following relational expression: 5 mm ≤ ox1 + ox2 + ox3 ≤ 30 mm, wherein ox1 is a thickness of the first lens group on the optical axis, ox2 is a thickness of the second lens group on the optical axis, and ox3 is a thickness of the third lens group on the optical axis. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have 5 mm ≤ ox1 + ox2 + ox3 ≤ 30 mm, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim, including are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art, In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233 (C.C.P.A. 1955).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LAUREN NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-1428. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Thursday, 8:00 AM -6:00 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jennifer Carruth, can be reached at 571-272-9791. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Lauren Nguyen/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2871
Prosecution Insights