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 .
Amendment
The Response, filed on June 6, 2026, has been received and made of record. In response to the Non-Final Office Action dated March 31, 2026, the specification and claims 1, 6, 11, 12 and 16 have been amended, claims 17 and 18 have been cancelled, and claims 21 and 22 have been newly added.
Response to Amendment
Regarding the 35 U.S.C. 102 rejection of claims 1-15, Applicant's arguments have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
Regarding the 35 U.S.C. 102 rejection of claims 16-20, Applicant has amended independent base claim 16 to incorporate the limitations of objected to dependent claim 18 and intervening claim 17. In light of this, the outstanding 35 U.S.C. 102 rejection of claims 16-20 are withdrawn.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 11, 12, 21 and 22 are rejected are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Publication No. 2017/0223245 to Park.
Regarding claim 11, Park teaches an optical accessory (e.g. fig. 2, elements 300, 310 and S2) for an image capture device (e.g. fig. 2, at least elements 11, 100 and 200) including a first lens (e.g., fig. 2, lens 210) located within a body of the image capture device when the optical accessory is connected to the image capture device (e.g., fig. 2), wherein the optical accessory is configured for removable connection to the image capture device (e.g., fig. 2) such that the image capture device is operable in a first configuration when the optical accessory is disconnected from the image capture device (e.g., as this is limitation is directed to functionality of the image capture device and not the recited optical accessory, the image capture device is not prevented from operation without the optical assembly accessory; further, the Examiner notes that the claim is directed to an optical accessory and not an image capture device) and in a second configuration when the optical accessory is connected to the image capture device to augment optical properties of the image capture device (e.g., fig. 2; as this is limitation is directed to functionality of the image capture device and not the recited optical accessory, the image capture device can be operable in a configuration including element 310 of figs. 2), and wherein the optical accessory is configured to transmit data to the image capture device in the second configuration (e.g., fig. 2, optical data passes through lens 310; the Examiner notes that structural means for transmission is not recited by the claim beyond that of a lens), wherein the optical accessory includes a second lens (e.g., fig. 2, element 310), a retaining mechanism (fig. 2, element 300) rotatably connectable to a barrel (e.g., fig. 2, element 200) on the image capture device (e.g., fig. 2, element S2), and a seal (e.g., fig. 2, element S2) configured to interface with the image capture device upon connection of the optical accessory (e.g., fig. 2).
Regarding claim 12, Park teaches all of the limitations of claim 12 (see the 35 U.S.C. 102 rejection to claim 11, supra) including teaching wherein the retaining mechanism configured for engagement with the image capture device (e.g., fig. 2) such that the second lens covers the first lens in the second configuration (e.g., fig. 2).
Regarding claim 21, Park teaches all of the limitations of claim 21 (see the 35 U.S.C. 102 rejection to claim 11, supra) including teaching wherein the retaining mechanism is configured for threaded connection to the barrel (e.g., fig. 2, element 300 threaded to element 200).
Regarding claim 22, Park teaches all of the limitations of claim 2 (see the 35 U.S.C. 102 rejection to claim 11, supra) including teaching wherein the seal is configured for compression between the retaining mechanism and the barrel (e.g., fig. 2, element S2 is compressed by threading of element 300 to element 200 and is located for compression between the elements, although not intervening and contiguous in arrangement).
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.
Claims 1-15 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO 2017068912 A1 to Pan et al. (employing US Patent Publication No. 2018/0224720 as a translation) in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2017/0223245 to Park.
Regarding claim 1, Pan teaches an optical accessory for an image capture device (e.g. fig. 3, elements 200 and 300) including a first lens (e.g., fig. 3, lens 302), the optical accessory comprising a second lens (e.g., fig. 3, element 104 or 106; [0080]), and a retaining mechanism directly connectable to a barrel (e.g., fig. 3, element 300) on the image capture device (e.g., fig. 1, via unlabeled bayonet mounting mechanism) such that the second lens covers the first lens (e.g., figs. 1 and 3), wherein the optical accessory is configured to transmit data to the image capture device when connected to the image capture device (e.g., fig. 3, via element 150; [0077], [0153]). Pan, however, has not been found by the Examiner to expressly disclose a seal positioned for compression between the retaining mechanism and the barrel upon connection of the optical accessory to the image capture device.
Nevertheless, Park teaches a similar apparatus employing a seal positioned for compression between a retaining mechanism and the barrel upon connection to an image capture device (e.g., fig. 1 and 2, element S1; [0068], [0075]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to have incorporated the teachings of Park into the accessory as taught by Pan in order to create a barrier for preventing water, debris, etc. from passing (although a 103 reference has been provided, the Examiner also notes that the use of seals and gaskets to deter the infiltration of moisture and debris are well known across the mechanical arts).
Regarding claim 2, Pan and Park teach all of the limitations of claim 2 (see the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection to claim 1, supra) including teaching wherein the optical accessory further includes a non-volatile memory (‘912 – e.g., fig. 3, element 126; [0075]).
Regarding claim 3, Pan and Park teach all of the limitations of claim 3 (see the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection to claim 2, supra) including teaching wherein the non-volatile memory is configured to store more than two bits of data (‘912 – e.g., [0075], firmware of the lens data and/or lens data of the interchangeable lens would require more than the 4 representable numbers of two bits of data).
Regarding claim 4, Pan and Park teach all of the limitations of claim 4 (see the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection to claim 2, supra) including teaching wherein the non-volatile memory is configured to store at least one of an identifier of the second lens (‘912 – e.g., [0075], [0094]), calibration data of the second lens ‘912 – (e.g., [0075], [0094]), and optical parameters of the second lens (‘912 – e.g., [0075], [0094]).
Regarding claim 5, Pan and Park teach all of the limitations of claim 5 (see the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection to claim 2, supra) including teaching wherein the optical accessory further includes a communications interface to transfer data from the non-volatile memory to the image capture device (‘912 – e.g., fig. 3, element 150 and via interface established by element 160 of fig. 3) such that the image capture device receives data stored in the non-volatile memory as signals transmitted via the communications interface (‘912 – e.g., fig. 3; [0100], [0153]).
Regarding claim 6, Pan and Park teach all of the limitations of claim 6 (see the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection to claim 5, supra) including teaching wherein the communications interface includes one or more first electrical conductors configured for contact with one or more second electrical conductors on the image capture device (‘912 – e.g., figs. 1, 3 and 4; [0106-109], via terminals).
Regarding claim 7, Pan and Park teach all of the limitations of claim 7 (see the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection to claim 5, supra) including teaching wherein the communications interface (‘912 – e.g., fig. 3, element 150 and interface established by element 160 of fig. 3) includes an identification tag (‘912 – e.g., fig. 3, element 150) configured to transmit signals to an identification reader in the image capture device (‘912 – e.g., fig. 3, element 250)..
Regarding claim 8, Pan and Park teach all of the limitations of claim 8 (see the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection to claim 1, supra) including teaching wherein the optical accessory is configured for threaded connection to the image capture device (‘912 – e.g., fig. 1, via a singular turn bayonet threading).
Regarding claim 9, Pan and Park teach all of the limitations of claim 9 (see the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection to claim 1, supra) including teaching wherein the second lens is configured to augment optical properties of the image capture device (‘912 – e.g., fig. 3, element 104 or 106; [0080]).
Regarding claim 10, Pan and Park teach all of the limitations of claim 10 (see the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection to claim 1, supra) including teaching wherein the optical accessory is configured for automatic detection by the image capture device (‘912 – e.g., [0139]).
Regarding claim 11, Pan teaches an optical accessory (e.g. fig. 3, element 100) for an image capture device (e.g. fig. 3, elements 200 and 300) including a first lens (e.g., fig. 3, lens 302) located within a body of the image capture device when the optical accessory is connected to the image capture device (e.g., figs. 1 and 3), wherein the optical accessory is configured for removable connection to the image capture device (e.g., fig. 1) such that the image capture device is operable in a first configuration when the optical accessory is disconnected from the image capture device (e.g., as this is limitation is directed to functionality of the image capture device and not the recited optical accessory, the image capture device is not prevented from operation without the optical assembly accessory; further, the Examiner notes that the claim is directed to an optical accessory and not an image capture device) and in a second configuration when the optical accessory is connected to the image capture device to augment optical properties of the image capture device (e.g., as this is limitation is directed to functionality of the image capture device and not the recited optical accessory, the image capture device can be operable in a configuration including element 100 of figs. 1 and 3), and wherein the optical accessory is configured to transmit data to the image capture device in the second configuration (e.g., [0077], [0153]; the Examiner notes that structural means for transmission is not recited by the claim), wherein the optical accessory includes a second lens (e.g., fig. 3, element 104 or 106), and a retaining mechanism (e.g., fig. 1, bayonet connectivity) rotatably connectable to a barrel on the image capture device (e.g., fig. 1, via unlabeled bayonet mounting connectivity). Pan, however, has not been found by the Examiner to expressly disclose a seal configured to interface with the image capture device upon connection of the optical accessory.
Nevertheless, Park teaches a similar apparatus employing a seal positioned for compression between a retaining mechanism and the barrel upon connection to an image capture device (e.g., fig. 1 and 2, element S1; [0068], [0075]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to have incorporated the teachings of Park into the accessory as taught by Pan in order to create a barrier for preventing water, debris, etc. from passing (although a 103 reference has been provided, the Examiner also notes that the use of seals and gaskets to deter the infiltration of moisture and debris are well known across the mechanical arts).
Regarding claim 12, Pan and Park teach all of the limitations of claim 12 (see the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection to claim 11, supra) including teaching wherein the retaining mechanism configured for engagement with the image capture device (‘912 – e.g., fig. 1, via unlabeled bayonet mounting mechanism) such that the second lens covers the first lens in the second configuration (‘912 – e.g., figs. 1 and 3).
Regarding claim 13, Pan and Park teach all of the limitations of claim 13 (see the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection to claim 12, supra) including teaching the further optical accessory including a non-volatile memory (‘912 – e.g., fig. 3, element 126; [0075]).
Regarding claim 14, Pan and Park teach all of the limitations of claim 14 (see the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection to claim 13, supra) including teaching wherein the non-volatile memory is configured to store more than two bits of data (‘912 – e.g., [0075], firmware of the lens data and/or lens data of the interchangeable lens would require more than the 4 representable numbers of two bits of data).
Regarding claim 15, Pan and Park teach all of the limitations of claim 15 (see the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection to claim 13, supra) including teaching wherein optical accessory is configured to transmit data stored in the non-volatile memory to the image capture device in the second configuration (‘912 – e.g., fig. 3; [0100], [0153]).
Regarding claim 22, Pan and Park teach all of the limitations of claim 22 (see the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection to claim 11, supra) including teaching wherein the seal is configured for compression between the retaining mechanism and the barrel (e.g., ‘245 – fig. 2 teaches seal placement between a retaining mechanism and a barrel). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to have incorporated seal and placement as taught by Park with the device as taught by Pan and Park, in order to create a barrier to moisture, debris, etc. when attached.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 16, 19 and 20 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Regarding claims 16, 19 and 20, the prior art has not been found by the Examiner to teach or fairly suggest the claimed combination of an optical accessory configured for removable connection to an image capture device including a first lens and a first electrical conductor, wherein the optical accessory is configured to augment optical properties of the image capture device and comprises a second lens configured to cover the first lens, a communications interface including a second electrical conductor configured for contact with the first electrical conductor to transfer data identifying the optical accessory to the image capture device, a retaining mechanism configured for threaded connection to a lens barrel of the image capture device supporting the first lens, and a seal positioned for compression between the retaining mechanism, the second lens, and the lens barrel upon connection of the optical accessory to the image capture device.
The closest references explicitly fail to teach a communications interface including a second electrical conductor configured for contact with a first electrical conductor to transfer data identifying the optical accessory to the image capture device in combination with a seal being positioned for compression between three elements, the retaining mechanism configured for threaded connection to a lens barrel of the image capture device supporting the first lens, the second lens, and the lens barrel, upon connection of the optical accessory to the image capture device.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Contact
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GARY C VIEAUX whose telephone number is (571)272-7318. The examiner can normally be reached Increased Flex.
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, Lin Ye can be reached at 571-272-7372. 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.
/GARY C VIEAUX/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2638
Prosecution Insights