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 .
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 A (figure 2), including claims 1-10 and 18-20, in the reply filed on 07/31/2026 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 § 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 1-10 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Satou et al. (WO 2015111703) in view of Takehara (JP 2011090056).
Regarding claim 1, Satou et al. (figures 1A-4) discloses a lens assembly comprising:
a first resin lens (21-22; see page 5, the last two paragraphs); and
a second resin lens superimposed on the first resin lens (21-22; see page 5, the last two paragraphs),
wherein the first resin lens includes a first convex portion (11a, 21e) on a surface facing the second resin lens,
wherein the second resin lens includes a plurality of first depressed portions (11b, 12b, 22, 23) on a surface facing the first resin lens, wherein the plurality of first depressed portions includes a first one of the plurality of first depressed portions and a second one of the plurality of first depressed portions, the first one of the plurality of first depressed portions being arranged at a first position in the surface facing the first resin lens, and the second one of the plurality of first depressed portions being arranged at a second position in the surface facing the first resin lens (figure 1B),
wherein, in a first state, the first convex portion is fitted into the first one of the plurality of first depressed portions, wherein,
in a second state, the first convex portion is fitted into the second one of the plurality of first depressed portions (the second positioning part 12 enables positioning in the optical axis AX direction by the convex part 11a and the groove part 12b. Further, in the second positioning part 12, the thin part 25 is formed by restricting the movement of the convex part 11a in the inherent restriction direction P2 perpendicular to the radial direction D2 while being allowed to move in the radial direction D2 with respect to the groove part 12b. Positioning in the tangential direction along the circumference is performed; see at least page 2, second paragraph).
Satou et al. discloses the limitations as shown in the rejection of claim 1 above. However, Satou et al. is silent regarding wherein even in the first state and the second state, a gate position of the first resin lens and a gate position of the second resin lens are not overlapped with each other in a rotational direction around an optical axis. Takehara (figures 22-24) teaches wherein even in the first state and the second state, a gate position of the first resin lens and a gate position of the second resin lens are not overlapped with each other in a rotational direction around an optical axis (41a-42a, or portions of lens between cutouts 41a and 42a; since the abutting portions 41a and 42a with the lens frame are bonded so as not to overlap each other, the influence on the optical performance deterioration can be reduced; see at least page 9, the last five paragraphs). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the gate as taught by Takehara in order to reduce optical performance deterioration.
Regarding claim 2, Satou et al. (figures 1A-1B) discloses wherein, even in the first state and the second state, the gate position of the second resin lens is a position rotated 15 degrees or more from the gate position of the first resin lens in the rotational direction around the optical axis (he first to third positioning portions 11, 12, and 13 are symmetrically arranged at intervals of 120 ° around the optical axis AX corresponding to the central axis. Specifically, the first positioning unit 11 is disposed in the 12 o'clock direction with respect to the optical axis AX, and the second positioning unit 12 is disposed in the 4 o'clock direction with respect to the optical axis AX as a third positioning; see at least page 4, 3rd paragraph).
Regarding claim 3, Satou et al. discloses the claimed invention except for wherein a plurality of first convex portions is provided, and a number of first depressed portions is greater than a number of first convex portions. Satou et al. (figures 1A-1B) discloses wherein a plurality of first convex portions is provided, and a number of first depressed portions is greater than a number of first convex portions (11a, 21e, 11b, 12b, 22, 23). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a number of first depressed portions being greater than a number of first convex portions, 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 4, Satou et al. discloses the claimed invention except for wherein a number of first depressed portions is an integral multiple of a number of first convex portions. Satou et al. (figures 1A-1B) discloses wherein a number of first depressed portions is an integral multiple of a number of first convex portions (11a, 21e, 11b, 12b, 22, 23). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a number of first depressed portions being an integral multiple of a number of first convex portions, 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 5, Satou et al. (figures 1A-1B) discloses wherein a surface shape of the first convex portion is different from a surface shape of the first depressed portion (11a, 21e, 11b, 12b, 22, 23).
Regarding claim 6, Satou et al. (figures 1A-1B) discloses wherein the first convex portion has a spherical surface, and the first depressed portion has a V-shape or a U-shape (11a, 21e, 11b, 12b, 22, 23).
Regarding claim 7, Satou et al. (figures 1A-1B) discloses wherein, when a direction in which the first resin lens and the second resin lens are superimposed is defined as an axis, the first depressed portion has a rectangular shape extending in a radial direction of the axis (11a, 21e, 11b, 12b, 22, 23).
Regarding claim 8, Satou et al. (figures 1A-1B) discloses wherein three first depressed portions are provided (11a, 21e, 11b, 12b, 22, 23).
Regarding claim 9, Satou et al. (figures 1A-1B) discloses wherein a direction in which the first resin lens and the second resin lens are superimposed is a direction in which an optical axis of the lens assembly extends (the second positioning part 12 enables positioning in the optical axis AX direction by the convex part 11a and the groove part 12b. Further, in the second positioning part 12, the thin part 25 is formed by restricting the movement of the convex part 11a in the inherent restriction direction P2 perpendicular to the radial direction D2 while being allowed to move in the radial direction D2 with respect to the groove part 12b. Positioning in the tangential direction along the circumference is performed; see at least page 2, second paragraph).
Regarding claim 10, Satou et al. (figures 1A-1B) discloses the second resin lens is a lens in which a thickness at a center of the lens is greater than a thickness at an outer periphery of the lens, and Takehara (figures 22-24) teaches wherein the gate position of the second resin lens is disposed not to be coincident with any of the first depressed portions in a rotational direction around an optical axis of the lens assembly (41a-42a, or portions of lens between cutouts 41a and 42a; since the abutting portions 41a and 42a with the lens frame are bonded so as not to overlap each other, the influence on the optical performance deterioration can be reduced; see at least page 9, the last five paragraphs).
Regarding claim 18, Satou et al. (figures 1A-1B) discloses a lens holder comprising the lens assembly according to claim 1 (60).
Regarding claim 19, Satou et al. (figures 1A-1B) discloses an imaging apparatus comprising: the lens holder according to claim 18; and an imaging device configured to receive light having passed through the lens holder (camera).
Regarding claim 20, Satou et al. (figures 1A-1B) discloses wherein the imaging device is disposed inside the lens holder (200).
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