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 .
The instant application having Application No. 18/963,922 filed on 11/29/2024 is presented for examination by the examiner.
Examiner Notes
Examiner cites particular columns and line numbers in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested that, in preparing responses, the applicant fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner.
Priority
As required by e M.P.E.P. 210, 200, 214, acknowledgement is made of applicant’s claim for priority based on application CN202311726667.5 (People’s Republic of China).
Receipt is acknowledged of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
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 1-5, 7-15, and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chang (CN 219737880 U)(Embodiment 2)(see attached machine translation), in view of Yuan (CN 115524897 A)(see attached machine translation), and further in view of Gross, “Handbook of Optical Systems”.
Regarding claim 1, Chang (Embodiment 2) discloses an optical system, in at least Figure 3, consisting of eight lenses having refractive power (page 13, paragraph 7 of translation states “The imaging lens system 200 may include a first lens 210, a second lens 220, a third lens 230, a fourth lens 240, a fifth lens 250, a sixth lens 260, a seventh lens 270, and an eighth lens 280”, Table 21), from an object side to an image side along an optical axis (Figure 3), the eight lenses sequentially comprising:
an aperture (“diaphragm”, page 12, paragraph 5 of translation states “the imaging lens system may also include a diaphragm disposed on the object side of the first lens or between the second lens and the third lens ... The diaphragm may be configured to adjust the amount of light incident on the imaging surface);
a first lens (210 “first lens”, Figure 3) having a positive refractive power (Table 21 shows that f1 = 5.9770), an object side surface of the first lens (210 “first lens”) being convex near the optical axis (page 13, paragraph 8 of translation states “The first lens 210 may have a positive refractive power, and may have a convex object side and a concave image side”), and an image side surface of the first lens (210 “first lens”) being concave near the optical axis (page 13, paragraph 8 of translation states “The first lens 210 may have a positive refractive power, and may have a convex object side and a concave image side”);
a second lens (220 “second lens”, Figure 3) having a negative refractive power (Table 21 shows that f2 = -14.284), an object side surface of the second lens (220 “second lens”) being convex near the optical axis (page 13, paragraph 8 of translation states “The second lens 220 may have a negative refractive power, and may have a convex object side and a concave image side”), and an image side surface of the second lens (220 “second lens”) being concave near the optical axis (page 13, paragraph 8 of translation states “The second lens 220 may have a negative refractive power, and may have a convex object side and a concave image side”);
a third lens (230 “third lens”, Figure 3) having a positive refractive power (Table 21 shows that f3 = 57.8488), and an object side surface of the third lens (230 “third lens”) being convex near the optical axis (page 13, paragraph 8 of translation states “The third lens 230 may have a positive refractive power, and may have a convex object side and a concave image side”);
a fourth lens (240 “fourth lens”, Figure 3) having a negative refractive power (Table 21 shows that f4 = -32.4058), and an object side surface of the fourth lens (240 “fourth lens”) being concave near the optical axis (page 13, paragraph 8 of translation states “The fourth lens 240 may have a negative refractive power, and may have a concave object side and a concave image side”);
a fifth lens (250 “fifth lens”, Figure 3) having a positive refractive power (Table 21 shows that f5 = 59.0959), and an object side surface of the fifth lens (250 “fifth lens”) being convex near the optical lens (page 13, paragraph 8 of translation states “The fifth lens 250 may have a positive refractive power and may have a convex object side and a convex image side”); and
a sixth lens (260 “sixth lens”, Figure 3) having refractive power (Table 21 shows that f6 = -682.013), an object side surface of the sixth lens (260 “sixth lens”) being convex near the optical axis (page 13, paragraph 8 of translation states “The sixth lens 260 may have a negative refractive power, and may have a convex object side and a concave image side”), and an image side surface of the sixth lens (260 “sixth lens”) being concave near the optical axis (page 13, paragraph 8 of translation states “The sixth lens 260 may have a negative refractive power, and may have a convex object side and a concave image side”);
a seventh lens (270 “seventh lens”, Figure 3) having a positive refractive power (Table 21 shows that f7 = 7.0985), an object side surface of the seventh lens (270 “seventh lens”) being convex near the optical axis (page 13, paragraph 8 of translation states “The seventh lens 270 may have a positive refractive power and may have a convex object side and a concave image side”), an image side surface of the seventh lens (270 “seventh lens”) being concave near the optical axis (page 13, paragraph 8 of translation states “The seventh lens 270 may have a positive refractive power and may have a convex object side and a concave image side”), and the image side surface of the seventh lens (270 “seventh lens”) having at least one inflection point (page 13, paragraph 8 of translation states “an inflection point may be formed on the object side and the image side of the seventh lens 270”); and
an eighth lens (280 “eighth lens”, Figure 3) having a negative refractive power (Table 21 shows that f8 = -5.0927), an image side surface of the eighth lens (280 “eighth lens”) being concave near the optical axis (page 13, paragraph 8 of translation states “The eighth lens 280 may have a negative refractive power and may have a convex object side and a concave image side”), and the image side surface of the eighth lens (280 “eighth lens”) having at least one inflection point (page 13, paragraph 8 of translation states “an inflection point may be formed on the object side and the image side of the eighth lens 280”);
wherein the optical system satisfies following relational expressions:
77 deg < FOV < 90 deg (Table 21 shows that HFOV = 42.356 deg, so therefore FOV = 84.712 deg which fall within the claimed range thereby anticipating the claimed range), and
1.24 < TTL/ImgH < 1.55 (Table 21 shows that TTL = 7.9995 and ImgH = 6.1290, so therefore TTL/ImgH = 1.305 which falls within the claimed range thereby anticipating the claimed range);
wherein, TTL is a distance from the object side surface of the first lens to an imaging surface of the optical system along the optical axis, ImgH is half of an image height corresponding to the maximum field of view of the optical system, and FOV is a maximum field of view of the optical system.
However, Chang does not disclose an adjustable aperture for adjusting an aperture size and an object side surface of the eighth lens being concave near the optical axis.
Yuan teaches an adjustable aperture for adjusting an aperture size (page 5, paragraph 13 of translation states “by adjusting the aperture value to adjust the aperture size of the variable aperture, so as to adjust the system light quantity, so that the camera lens can be realized in the bright state, dark environment, shooting can reach clear imaging effect. In addition, the continuous change of the aperture value, can realize continuous change of depth of field, improving the user experience effect of different depth background blurring”).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the optical system of Chang modified by an adjustable aperture for adjusting an aperture size, as taught by Yuan, in order to be able to operate the camera effectively in bright or dark locations and obtain a clear image (page 5, paragraph 13 of translation).
Gross, page 378, section 33.1.4, teaches that bending a lens is amongst the typical operations that an ordinary skilled artisan would employ when trying to find a design with better optical performance. Gross further teaches that bending a lens can be done without changing the refractive power. An ordinary skilled artisan would know that “bending a lens” corresponds to changing the radii of curvature of the two surfaces of the lens.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to optimize the radii of the object side of the eighth lens such that an object side surface of the eighth lens is concave near the optical axis because Gross teaches that bending a lens is amongst the typical zero-power operations that an ordinary skilled artisan would employ when trying to find a design with better optical performance (Gross page 378 section 33.1.4).
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Chang, Yuan, and Gross disclose all the limitations of claim 1 and Chang further discloses at least one of following relational expressions:
0.9 < f1/f < 1.4 (Table 21 shows that f1 = 5.977 and f = 6.574, so therefore f1/f = 0.909 which falls within the claimed range thereby anticipating the claimed range),
-11 < f2/f < -2.5,
4 < f3/f (Table 21 shows that f3 = 57.8488 and f = 6.574, so therefore f3/f = 8.799 which falls within the claimed range thereby anticipating the claimed range),
f4/f < -2 (Table 21 shows that f4 = -32.4058 and f = 6.574, so therefore f4/f = -4.929 which falls within the claimed range thereby anticipating the claimed range),
3 < f5/f < 7,
18 < |f6|/f (Table 21 shows that f6 = -682.013 and f = 6.574, so therefore |f6|/f = 103.744 which falls within the claimed range thereby anticipating the claimed range),
1.1 < f7/f < 1.5, and
-1.2 < f8/f < -0.7 (Table 21 shows that f8 = -5.0927 and f = 6.574, so therefore f8/f = -0.775 which falls within the claimed range thereby anticipating the claimed range);
wherein, f1 is an effective focal length of the first lens, f2 is an effective focal length of the second lens, f3 is an effective focal length of the third lens, f4 is an effective focal length of the fourth lens, f5 is an effective focal length of the fifth lens, f6 is an effective focal length of the sixth lens, f7 is an effective focal length of the seventh lens, f8 is an effective focal length of the eighth lens, and f is an effective focal length of the optical system.
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Chang, Yuan, and Gross disclose all the limitations of claim 1 and Chang further discloses at least one of following relational expressions:
0.4 < R1/f < 0.55 (Table 3 shows that R1 = 2.739 and Table 21 shows that f = 6.574, so therefore R1/f = 0.4166 which falls within the claimed range thereby anticipating the claimed range),
1.45 < R2/f < 2.4 (Table 3 shows that R2 = 14.367 and Table 21 shows that f = 6.574, so therefore R2/f = 2.185 which falls within the claimed range thereby anticipating the claimed range),
0.9 < R3/f < 2 (Table 3 shows that R3 = 9.100 and Table 21 shows that f = 6.574, so therefore R3/f = 1.384 which falls within the claimed range thereby anticipating the claimed range),
0.8 < R4/f < 1,
3 < R5/f < 4,
3.9 < |R6|/f (Table 3 shows that R6 = 31.081 and Table 21 shows that f = 6.574, so therefore |R6|/f = 4.728 which falls within the claimed range thereby anticipating the claimed range),
2.7 < |R7|/f (Table 3 shows that R7 = -325.319 and Table 21 shows that f = 6.574, so therefore |R7|/f = 49.485 which falls within the claimed range thereby anticipating the claimed range),
1.8 < R8/f < 2.3,
2.6 < R9/f < 3.7,
R10/f < -4 (Table 3 shows that R10 = -850.402 and Table 21 shows that f = 6.574, so therefore R10/f = -129.358 which falls within the claimed range thereby anticipating the claimed range),
2.1 < R11/f < 2.8,
1.9 < R12/f < 2.5,
0.3 < R13/f < 0.45,
0.6 < R14/f < 0.9,
-5 < R15/f < -3,
0.4 < R16/f < 0.8,
9 < (R11+R12)/(R11-R12) (Table 3 shows that R11 = 26.446 and R12 = 24.603, so therefore (R11+R12)/(R11-R12) = 27.698 which falls within the claimed range thereby anticipating the claimed range), and
-8 < R15/R16 < -5;
wherein, R1 is a curvature radius of the object side surface of the first lens at the optical axis, R2 is a curvature radius of the image side surface of the first lens at the optical axis, R3 is a curvature radius of the object side surface of the second lens at the optical axis, R4 is a curvature radius of the image side surface of the second lens at the optical axis, R5 is a curvature radius of the object side surface of the third lens at optical axis, R6 is a curvature radius of an image side surface of the third lens at the optical axis, R7 is a curvature radius of an object side surface of the fourth lens at the optical axis, R8 is a curvature radius of the image side surface of the fourth lens at the optical axis, R9 is a curvature radius of the object side surface of the fifth lens at the optical axis, R10 is a curvature radius of an image side surface of the fifth lens at the optical axis, R11 is a curvature radius of the object side surface of the sixth lens at the optical axis, R12 is a curvature radius of the image side surface of the sixth lens at the optical axis, R13 is a curvature radius of the object side surface of the seventh lens at the optical axis, R14 is a curvature radius of the image side surface of the seventh lens at the optical axis, R15 is a curvature radius of the object side surface of the eighth lens at the optical axis, R16 is a curvature radius of the image side surface of the eighth lens at the optical axis, and f is an effective focal length of the optical system.
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Chang, Yuan, and Gross disclose all the limitations of claim 1 and Chang further discloses at least one of following relational expressions:
1.35 < f12/f < 1.5 (By calculation using values from Table 3, f12 = 8.964 and Table 21 shows that f = 6.574, so therefore f12/f = 1.363 which falls within the claimed range thereby anticipating the claimed range),
9 < f345/f (By calculation using values from Table 3, f345 = 278.52 and Table 21 shows that f = 6.574, so therefore f345/f = 42.367 which falls within the claimed range thereby anticipating the claimed range), and
3.8 < |f678|/f (By calculation using values from Table 3, f678 = -110.409 and Table 21 shows that f = 6.574, so therefore |f678|/f = 19.794 which falls within the claimed range thereby anticipating the claimed range);
wherein, f is an effective focal length of the optical system, f12 is a combined effective focal length of the first lens and the second lens, f345 is a combined effective focal length of the third lens, the fourth lens, and the fifth lens, and f678 is a combined effective focal length of the sixth lens, the seventh lens, and the eighth lens.
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Chang, Yuan, and Gross disclose all the limitations of claim 1 and Chang further discloses at least one of following relational expressions:
30 < FOV/(FNOmax-FNOmin) < 35,
1.22 < TTL/f < 1.3,
0.82 < ImgH/f < 1 (Table 21 shows that ImgH = 6.1290 and f = 6.5740, so therefore ImgH/f = 0.932 which falls within the claimed range thereby anticipating the claimed range), and
0.85 < DL/TTL < 0.9;
wherein, DL is a distance from the object side surface of the first lens to the image side surface of the eighth lens along the optical axis, f is an effective focal length of the optical system, FNOmax is a maximum aperture number of the optical system, and FNOmin is a minimum aperture number of the optical system.
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Chang, Yuan, and Gross disclose all the limitations of claim 1 and Chang discloses at least one of following relational expressions:
0.55 < Yc72/SD72 < 0.65 (By measurement using Figure 3, Yc72 = 5.8 units and SD72 = 10 units, so therefore Yc72/SD72 = 0.58 which falls within the claimed range thereby anticipating the claimed range), and
0.3 < Yc82/SD82 < 0.4 (By measurement using Figure 3, Yc82 = 5.1 units and SD82 = 13.9 units, so therefore Yc82/SD82 = 0.366 which falls within the claimed range thereby anticipating the claimed range);
wherein, Yc72 is a vertical height from an off-axis vertex of the image side surface of the seventh lens to the optical axis, SD72 is a maximum effective aperture of the image side surface of the seventh lens, Yc82 is a vertical height from an off-axis vertex of the image side surface of the eighth lens to the optical axis, and SD82 is a maximum effective aperture of the image side surface of the eighth lens.
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Chang, Yuan, and Gross disclose all the limitations of claim 1 and Chang further discloses at least one of following relational expressions:
4 < CT1/CT2 < 5 (Table 3 shows that CT1 = 1.191 and CT2 = 0.210, so therefore CT1/CT2 = 4.875 which falls within the claimed range thereby anticipating the claimed range),
1.1 < CT4/CT3 < 1.2,
1.7 < CT5/CT4 < 2,
1.3 < CT5/CT6 < 1.65,
0.6 < CT8/CT7 < 0.9 (Table 3 shows that CT8 = 0.430 and CT7 = 0.549, so therefore CT8/CT7 = 0.783 which falls within the claimed range thereby anticipating the claimed range),
2.3 < AT23/(AT12+AT34) < 2.9,
1.15 < ET7/ET6 < 1.75,
1.1 < ET7/CT7 < 1.42, and
0.85 < AT78/CT1 < 1;
wherein, AT12 is a distance from the image side surface of the first lens to the object side surface of the second lens along the optical axis, AT23 is a distance from the image side surface of the second lens to the object side surface of the third lens along the optical axis, AT34 is a distance from an image side surface of the third lens to an object side surface of the fourth lens along the optical axis, AT78 is a distance from the image side surface of the seventh lens to the object side surface of the eighth lens along the optical axis, ET6 is a distance from a position where the object side surface of the sixth lens has a maximum effective aperture to a position where the image side surface of the sixth lens has a maximum effective aperture along the optical axis, and ET7 is a distance from a position where the object side surface of the seventh lens has a maximum effective aperture to a position where the image side surface of the seventh lens has a maximum effective aperture, CTn is a thickness of a nth lens on the optical axis, and n is 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, or 8.
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Chang, Yuan, and Gross disclose all the limitations of claim 1 and Chang further discloses a camera module (“camera module”, page 2, paragraph 5 of translation states "The portable electronic device may include a camera module to obtain an image or video. For example, the camera module may be mounted on a mobile phone, laptop computer, gaming device, or the like") comprising the optical system of claim 1 (page 13, paragraph 9 of translation) and a photosensitive chip (IP "imaging surface", Figure 3), and the photosensitive chip (IP "imaging surface") located on an image side of the optical system (page 13, paragraph 9 of translation states "The imaging surface IP may be formed on one surface of the image sensor IS of the camera module or in the image sensor IS").
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Chang, Yuan, and Gross disclose all the limitations of claim 9 and Chang further discloses an electronic device comprising a housing (“mobile phone, laptop computer, gaming device”) and a camera module (“camera module”) of claim 9, and the camera module (“camera module”) located in the housing (page 2, paragraph 5 of translation states "the camera module may be mounted on a mobile phone, laptop computer, gaming device").
Regarding claim 11, Chang (Embodiment 2) discloses an optical system, in at least Figure 3, consisting of eight lenses having refractive power (page 13, paragraph 7 of translation states “The imaging lens system 200 may include a first lens 210, a second lens 220, a third lens 230, a fourth lens 240, a fifth lens 250, a sixth lens 260, a seventh lens 270, and an eighth lens 280”, Table 21), from an object side to an image side along an optical axis (Figure 3), the eight lenses sequentially comprising:
an aperture (“diaphragm”, page 12, paragraph 5 of translation states “the imaging lens system may also include a diaphragm disposed on the object side of the first lens or between the second lens and the third lens ... The diaphragm may be configured to adjust the amount of light incident on the imaging surface);
a first lens (210 “first lens”, Figure 3) having a positive refractive power (Table 21 shows that f1 = 5.9770), an object side surface of the first lens (210 “first lens”) being convex near the optical axis (page 13, paragraph 8 of translation states “The first lens 210 may have a positive refractive power, and may have a convex object side and a concave image side”), and an image side surface of the first lens (210 “first lens”) being concave near the optical axis (page 13, paragraph 8 of translation states “The first lens 210 may have a positive refractive power, and may have a convex object side and a concave image side”);
a second lens (220 “second lens”, Figure 3) having a negative refractive power (Table 21 shows that f2 = -14.284), an object side surface of the second lens (220 “second lens”) being convex near the optical axis (page 13, paragraph 8 of translation states “The second lens 220 may have a negative refractive power, and may have a convex object side and a concave image side”), and an image side surface of the second lens (220 “second lens”) being concave near the optical axis (page 13, paragraph 8 of translation states “The second lens 220 may have a negative refractive power, and may have a convex object side and a concave image side”);
a third lens (230 “third lens”, Figure 3) having a positive refractive power (Table 21 shows that f3 = 57.8488), and an object side surface of the third lens (230 “third lens”) being convex near the optical axis (page 13, paragraph 8 of translation states “The third lens 230 may have a positive refractive power, and may have a convex object side and a concave image side”);
a fourth lens (240 “fourth lens”, Figure 3) having a negative refractive power (Table 21 shows that f4 = -32.4058), and an object side surface of the fourth lens (240 “fourth lens”) being concave near the optical axis (page 13, paragraph 8 of translation states “The fourth lens 240 may have a negative refractive power, and may have a concave object side and a concave image side”);
a fifth lens (250 “fifth lens”, Figure 3) having a positive refractive power (Table 21 shows that f5 = 59.0959), and an object side surface of the fifth lens (250 “fifth lens”) being convex near the optical lens (page 13, paragraph 8 of translation states “The fifth lens 250 may have a positive refractive power and may have a convex object side and a convex image side”); and
a sixth lens (260 “sixth lens”, Figure 3) having refractive power (Table 21 shows that f6 = -682.013), an object side surface of the sixth lens (260 “sixth lens”) being convex near the optical axis (page 13, paragraph 8 of translation states “The sixth lens 260 may have a negative refractive power, and may have a convex object side and a concave image side”), and an image side surface of the sixth lens (260 “sixth lens”) being concave near the optical axis (page 13, paragraph 8 of translation states “The sixth lens 260 may have a negative refractive power, and may have a convex object side and a concave image side”);
a seventh lens (270 “seventh lens”, Figure 3) having a positive refractive power (Table 21 shows that f7 = 7.0985), an object side surface of the seventh lens (270 “seventh lens”) being convex near the optical axis (page 13, paragraph 8 of translation states “The seventh lens 270 may have a positive refractive power and may have a convex object side and a concave image side”), an image side surface of the seventh lens (270 “seventh lens”) being concave near the optical axis (page 13, paragraph 8 of translation states “The seventh lens 270 may have a positive refractive power and may have a convex object side and a concave image side”), and the image side surface of the seventh lens (270 “seventh lens”) having at least one inflection point (page 13, paragraph 8 of translation states “an inflection point may be formed on the object side and the image side of the seventh lens 270”); and
an eighth lens (280 “eighth lens”, Figure 3) having a negative refractive power (Table 21 shows that f8 = -5.0927), an image side surface of the eighth lens (280 “eighth lens”) being concave near the optical axis (page 13, paragraph 8 of translation states “The eighth lens 280 may have a negative refractive power and may have a convex object side and a concave image side”), and the image side surface of the eighth lens (280 “eighth lens”) having at least one inflection point (page 13, paragraph 8 of translation states “an inflection point may be formed on the object side and the image side of the eighth lens 280”);
wherein the optical system satisfies following relational expressions:
77 deg < FOV < 90 deg (Table 21 shows that HFOV = 42.356 deg, so therefore FOV = 84.712 deg which fall within the claimed range thereby anticipating the claimed range), and
0.82 < ImgH/f < 1 (Table 21 shows that ImgH = 6.1290 and f = 6.5740, so therefore ImgH/f = 0.932 which falls within the claimed range thereby anticipating the claimed range);
wherein, f is an effective focal length of the optical system, ImgH is half of an image height corresponding to the maximum field of view of the optical system, and FOV is a maximum field of view of the optical system.
However, Chang does not disclose an adjustable aperture for adjusting an aperture size and an object side surface of the eighth lens being concave near the optical axis.
Yuan teaches an adjustable aperture for adjusting an aperture size (page 5, paragraph 13 of translation states “by adjusting the aperture value to adjust the aperture size of the variable aperture, so as to adjust the system light quantity, so that the camera lens can be realized in the bright state, dark environment, shooting can reach clear imaging effect. In addition, the continuous change of the aperture value, can realize continuous change of depth of field, improving the user experience effect of different depth background blurring”).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the optical system of Chang modified by an adjustable aperture for adjusting an aperture size, as taught by Yuan, in order to be able to operate the camera effectively in bright or dark locations and obtain a clear image (page 5, paragraph 13 of translation).
Gross, page 378, section 33.1.4, teaches that bending a lens is amongst the typical operations that an ordinary skilled artisan would employ when trying to find a design with better optical performance. Gross further teaches that bending a lens can be done without changing the refractive power. An ordinary skilled artisan would know that “bending a lens” corresponds to changing the radii of curvature of the two surfaces of the lens.
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to optimize the radii of the object side of the eighth lens such that an object side surface of the eighth lens is concave near the optical axis because Gross teaches that bending a lens is amongst the typical zero-power operations that an ordinary skilled artisan would employ when trying to find a design with better optical performance (Gross page 378 section 33.1.4).
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Chang, Yuan, and Gross disclose all the limitations of claim 11 and Chang further discloses at least one of following relational expressions:
0.9 < f1/f < 1.4 (Table 21 shows that f1 = 5.977 and f = 6.574, so therefore f1/f = 0.909 which falls within the claimed range thereby anticipating the claimed range),
-11 < f2/f < -2.5,
4 < f3/f (Table 21 shows that f3 = 57.8488 and f = 6.574, so therefore f3/f = 8.799 which falls within the claimed range thereby anticipating the claimed range),
f4/f < -2 (Table 21 shows that f4 = -32.4058 and f = 6.574, so therefore f4/f = -4.929 which falls within the claimed range thereby anticipating the claimed range),
3 < f5/f < 7,
18 < |f6|/f (Table 21 shows that f6 = -682.013 and f = 6.574, so therefore |f6|/f = 103.744 which falls within the claimed range thereby anticipating the claimed range),
1.1 < f7/f < 1.5, and
-1.2 < f8/f < -0.7 (Table 21 shows that f8 = -5.0927 and f = 6.574, so therefore f8/f = -0.775 which falls within the claimed range thereby anticipating the claimed range);
wherein, f1 is an effective focal length of the first lens, f2 is an effective focal length of the second lens, f3 is an effective focal length of the third lens, f4 is an effective focal length of the fourth lens, f5 is an effective focal length of the fifth lens, f6 is an effective focal length of the sixth lens, f7 is an effective focal length of the seventh lens, f8 is an effective focal length of the eighth lens, and f is an effective focal length of the optical system.
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Chang, Yuan, and Gross disclose all the limitations of claim 11 and Chang further discloses at least one of following relational expressions:
0.4 < R1/f < 0.55 (Table 3 shows that R1 = 2.739 and Table 21 shows that f = 6.574, so therefore R1/f = 0.4166 which falls within the claimed range thereby anticipating the claimed range),
1.45 < R2/f < 2.4 (Table 3 shows that R2 = 14.367 and Table 21 shows that f = 6.574, so therefore R2/f = 2.185 which falls within the claimed range thereby anticipating the claimed range),
0.9 < R3/f < 2 (Table 3 shows that R3 = 9.100 and Table 21 shows that f = 6.574, so therefore R3/f = 1.384 which falls within the claimed range thereby anticipating the claimed range),
0.8 < R4/f < 1,
3 < R5/f < 4,
3.9 < |R6|/f (Table 3 shows that R6 = 31.081 and Table 21 shows that f = 6.574, so therefore |R6|/f = 4.728 which falls within the claimed range thereby anticipating the claimed range),
2.7 < |R7|/f (Table 3 shows that R7 = -325.319 and Table 21 shows that f = 6.574, so therefore |R7|/f = 49.485 which falls within the claimed range thereby anticipating the claimed range),
1.8 < R8/f < 2.3,
2.6 < R9/f < 3.7,
R10/f < -4 (Table 3 shows that R10 = -850.402 and Table 21 shows that f = 6.574, so therefore R10/f = -129.358 which falls within the claimed range thereby anticipating the claimed range),
2.1 < R11/f < 2.8,
1.9 < R12/f < 2.5,
0.3 < R13/f < 0.45,
0.6 < R14/f < 0.9,
-5 < R15/f < -3,
0.4 < R16/f < 0.8,
9 < (R11+R12)/(R11-R12) (Table 3 shows that R11 = 26.446 and R12 = 24.603, so therefore (R11+R12)/(R11-R12) = 27.698 which falls within the claimed range thereby anticipating the claimed range), and
-8 < R15/R16 < -5;
wherein, R1 is a curvature radius of the object side surface of the first lens at the optical axis, R2 is a curvature radius of the image side surface of the first lens at the optical axis, R3 is a curvature radius of the object side surface of the second lens at the optical axis, R4 is a curvature radius of the image side surface of the second lens at the optical axis, R5 is a curvature radius of the object side surface of the third lens at optical axis, R6 is a curvature radius of an image side surface of the third lens at the optical axis, R7 is a curvature radius of an object side surface of the fourth lens at the optical axis, R8 is a curvature radius of the image side surface of the fourth lens at the optical axis, R9 is a curvature radius of the object side surface of the fifth lens at the optical axis, R10 is a curvature radius of an image side surface of the fifth lens at the optical axis, R11 is a curvature radius of the object side surface of the sixth lens at the optical axis, R12 is a curvature radius of the image side surface of the sixth lens at the optical axis, R13 is a curvature radius of the object side surface of the seventh lens at the optical axis, R14 is a curvature radius of the image side surface of the seventh lens at the optical axis, R15 is a curvature radius of the object side surface of the eighth lens at the optical axis, R16 is a curvature radius of the image side surface of the eighth lens at the optical axis, and f is an effective focal length of the optical system.
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Chang, Yuan, and Gross disclose all the limitations of claim 11 and Chang further discloses at least one of following relational expressions:
1.35 < f12/f < 1.5 (By calculation using values from Table 3, f12 = 8.964 and Table 21 shows that f = 6.574, so therefore f12/f = 1.363 which falls within the claimed range thereby anticipating the claimed range),
9 < f345/f (By calculation using values from Table 3, f345 = 278.52 and Table 21 shows that f = 6.574, so therefore f345/f = 42.367 which falls within the claimed range thereby anticipating the claimed range), and
3.8 < |f678|/f (By calculation using values from Table 3, f678 = -110.409 and Table 21 shows that f = 6.574, so therefore |f678|/f = 19.794 which falls within the claimed range thereby anticipating the claimed range);
wherein, f is an effective focal length of the optical system, f12 is a combined effective focal length of the first lens and the second lens, f345 is a combined effective focal length of the third lens, the fourth lens, and the fifth lens, and f678 is a combined effective focal length of the sixth lens, the seventh lens, and the eighth lens.
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Chang, Yuan, and Gross disclose all the limitations of claim 11 and Chang further discloses at least one of following relational expressions:
30 < FOV/(FNOmax-FNOmin) < 35,
1.22 < TTL/f < 1.3, and
0.85 < DL/TTL < 0.9;
wherein, DL is a distance from the object side surface of the first lens to the image side surface of the eighth lens along the optical axis, f is an effective focal length of the optical system, FNOmax is a maximum aperture number of the optical system, and FNOmin is a minimum aperture number of the optical system.
Regarding claim 17, the combination of Chang, Yuan, and Gross disclose all the limitations of claim 11 and Chang discloses at least one of following relational expressions:
0.55 < Yc72/SD72 < 0.65 (By measurement using Figure 3, Yc72 = 5.8 units and SD72 = 10 units, so therefore Yc72/SD72 = 0.58 which falls within the claimed range thereby anticipating the claimed range), and
0.3 < Yc82/SD82 < 0.4 (By measurement using Figure 3, Yc82 = 5.1 units and SD82 = 13.9 units, so therefore Yc82/SD82 = 0.366 which falls within the claimed range thereby anticipating the claimed range);
wherein, Yc72 is a vertical height from an off-axis vertex of the image side surface of the seventh lens to the optical axis, SD72 is a maximum effective aperture of the image side surface of the seventh lens, Yc82 is a vertical height from an off-axis vertex of the image side surface of the eighth lens to the optical axis, and SD82 is a maximum effective aperture of the image side surface of the eighth lens.
Regarding claim 18, the combination of Chang, Yuan, and Gross disclose all the limitations of claim 11 and Chang further discloses at least one of following relational expressions:
4 < CT1/CT2 < 5 (Table 3 shows that CT1 = 1.191 and CT2 = 0.210, so therefore CT1/CT2 = 4.875 which falls within the claimed range thereby anticipating the claimed range),
1.1 < CT4/CT3 < 1.2,
1.7 < CT5/CT4 < 2,
1.3 < CT5/CT6 < 1.65,
0.6 < CT8/CT7 < 0.9 (Table 3 shows that CT8 = 0.430 and CT7 = 0.549, so therefore CT8/CT7 = 0.783 which falls within the claimed range thereby anticipating the claimed range),
2.3 < AT23/(AT12+AT34) < 2.9,
1.15 < ET7/ET6 < 1.75,
1.1 < ET7/CT7 < 1.42, and
0.85 < AT78/CT1 < 1;
wherein, AT12 is a distance from the image side surface of the first lens to the object side surface of the second lens along the optical axis, AT23 is a distance from the image side surface of the second lens to the object side surface of the third lens along the optical axis, AT34 is a distance from an image side surface of the third lens to an object side surface of the fourth lens along the optical axis, AT78 is a distance from the image side surface of the seventh lens to the object side surface of the eighth lens along the optical axis, ET6 is a distance from a position where the object side surface of the sixth lens has a maximum effective aperture to a position where the image side surface of the sixth lens has a maximum effective aperture along the optical axis, and ET7 is a distance from a position where the object side surface of the seventh lens has a maximum effective aperture to a position where the image side surface of the seventh lens has a maximum effective aperture, CTn is a thickness of a nth lens on the optical axis, and n is 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, or 8.
Regarding claim 19, the combination of Chang, Yuan, and Gross disclose all the limitations of claim 11 and Chang further discloses a camera module (“camera module”, page 2, paragraph 5 of translation states "The portable electronic device may include a camera module to obtain an image or video. For example, the camera module may be mounted on a mobile phone, laptop computer, gaming device, or the like") comprising the optical system of claim 11 (page 13, paragraph 9 of translation) and a photosensitive chip (IP "imaging surface", Figure 3), and the photosensitive chip (IP "imaging surface") located on an image side of the optical system (page 13, paragraph 9 of translation states "The imaging surface IP may be formed on one surface of the image sensor IS of the camera module or in the image sensor IS").
Regarding claim 20, the combination of Chang, Yuan, and Gross disclose all the limitations of claim 11 and Chang further discloses an electronic device comprising a housing (“mobile phone, laptop computer, gaming device”) and a camera module (“camera module”) of claim 9, and the camera module (“camera module”) located in the housing (page 2, paragraph 5 of translation states "the camera module may be mounted on a mobile phone, laptop computer, gaming device").
Claims 6 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chang (CN 219737880 U)(Embodiment 2)(see attached machine translation), in view of Yuan (CN 115524897 A)(see attached machine translation), in view of Gross, “Handbook of Optical Systems”, and further in view of Lee (KR 20230020883 A)(Embodiment 1)(see attached machine translation).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Chang, Yuan, and Gross disclose all the limitations of claim 1, however Chang does not disclose at least one of following relational expressions:
3.5 < f8/SAG81 < 5.5,
3 < f8/SAG82 < 6.3, and
-6.5 < (SAG81+SAG82)/CT8 < -4;
wherein, f8 is an effective focal length of the eighth lens, SAG81 is a sagittal height of the object side surface of the eighth lens at a maximum effective aperture, SAG 82 is a sagittal height of the image side of the eighth lens at a maximum effective aperture, and CT8 is a thickness of the eight lens on the optical axis.
Lee (Embodiment 1) teaches f8/SAG82 < 6.3 (first paragraph of page 7 of translation states “SAG82 is -1.1111” and Table 1 shows that f8 = -3.24, so therefore f8/SAG82 = 2.916).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the optical system of Chang modified by f8/SAG82 < 6.3, as taught by Lee, constrain the size of the optical system.
Thus, Lee discloses the claimed limitation except for 3 < f8/SAG82 < 6.3. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify f8 or SAG82 such that 3 < f8/SAG82 < 6.3, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim 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 the current instance, f8/SAG82 is an art recognized results effective variable in that is represents the ratio of the focal length to the sagittal height of the eighth lens. Thus, one would have been motivated to optimize f8/SAG82 because it is an art-recognized result-effective variable and it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art, In re Antonie, 559 F.2d 618, 195 USPQ 6 (CCPA 1977). See MPEP §2144.05(II)(B) “after KSR, the presence of a known result-effective variable would be one, but not the only, motivation for a personal of ordinary skill in the art to experiment to reach another workable product or process.” Furthermore, one of ordinary skill in the art would have a reasonable expectation of success when making this modification because Lee teaches that f8/SAG82 = 2.916 which is only 2.8% away from the lower limit of the conditional expression.
Regarding claim 16, the combination of Chang, Yuan, and Gross disclose all the limitations of claim 11, however Chang does not disclose at least one of following relational expressions:
3.5 < f8/SAG81 < 5.5,
3 < f8/SAG82 < 6.3, and
-6.5 < (SAG81+SAG82)/CT8 < -4;
wherein, f8 is an effective focal length of the eighth lens, SAG81 is a sagittal height of the object side surface of the eighth lens at a maximum effective aperture, SAG 82 is a sagittal height of the image side of the eighth lens at a maximum effective aperture, and CT8 is a thickness of the eight lens on the optical axis.
Lee (Embodiment 1) teaches f8/SAG82 < 6.3 (first paragraph of page 7 of translation states “SAG82 is -1.1111” and Table 1 shows that f8 = -3.24, so therefore f8/SAG82 = 2.916).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the optical system of Chang modified by f8/SAG82 < 6.3, as taught by Lee, in order to constrain the size of the optical system.
Thus, Lee discloses the claimed limitation except for 3 < f8/SAG82 < 6.3. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify f8 or SAG82 such that 3 < f8/SAG82 < 6.3, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim 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 the current instance, f8/SAG82 is an art recognized results effective variable in that is represents the ratio of the focal length to the sagittal height of the eighth lens. Thus, one would have been motivated to optimize f8/SAG82 because it is an art-recognized result-effective variable and it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art, In re Antonie, 559 F.2d 618, 195 USPQ 6 (CCPA 1977). See MPEP §2144.05(II)(B) “after KSR, the presence of a known result-effective variable would be one, but not the only, motivation for a personal of ordinary skill in the art to experiment to reach another workable product or process.” Furthermore, one of ordinary skill in the art would have a reasonable expectation of success when making this modification because Lee teaches that f8/SAG82 = 2.916 which is only 2.8% away from the lower limit of the conditional expression.
Contact Information
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to the applicant’s disclosure.
Long (CN 114740594 A)(see attached machine translation) discloses an optical system including eight lenses with refractive powers for the lenses corresponding to positive, negative, positive, negative, positive, negative, positive, negative and where the image side surfaces of both seventh and eighth lenses have inflection points.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALAINA M SWANSON whose telephone number is (703)756-5809. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri, 7:30am-4:00pm.
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 at 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.
/ALAINA MARIE SWANSON/Examiner, Art Unit 2872
/WILLIAM R ALEXANDER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Prosecution Insights