Prosecution Insights
Last updated: September 17, 2026
Application No. 18/981,760

OPTICAL IMAGING LENS ASSEMBLY

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Dec 16, 2024
Priority
Jun 17, 2024 — CN 202410779043.8
Examiner
LEI, JIE
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
Zhejiang Sunny Optics Co. Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
73%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
1y 0m
Est. Remaining
90%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 73% — above average
73%
Career Allowance Rate
678 granted / 926 resolved
+13.2% vs TC avg
Strong +17% interview lift
Without
With
+16.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
46 currently pending
Career history
954
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.7%
-39.3% vs TC avg
§103
45.3%
+5.3% vs TC avg
§102
27.0%
-13.0% vs TC avg
§112
22.9%
-17.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 926 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
DETAILED ACTION The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . 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. Priority Receipt is acknowledged of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 7/10/2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements have been considered by the examiner. 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 of this title, 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, 4-5, 11-13 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kawasaki (JP 2015072403, English translation attached) in a view of Song et al (CN 217360436, US equivalent US 20230400662, all the line numbers listed below are line numbers in US 20230400662). Regarding Claim 1, Kawasaki teaches an optical imaging lens assembly (abstract; figs. 11, 13 and 21, comprising: an optical lens group, comprising a first lens, a second lens, a third lens, a fourth lens, a fifth lens, a sixth lens and a seventh lens that are sequentially arranged along an optical axis from an object side to an image side (fig. 11, L1--L7), wherein the first lens has a positive refractive power, the second lens has a negative refractive power, the third lens has a negative refractive power, the fourth lens has a positive refractive power, the fifth lens has a positive refractive power, the sixth lens has a positive refractive power, and the seventh lens has a negative refractive power (¶[0115], Table 12, focal lengths for L1-L7; also see fig. 13, L1-L7; ¶[0121], Table 15, focal lengths for L1-L7); a spacing piece group, comprising a fifth spacing piece and a sixth spacing piece, wherein the fifth spacing piece is placed between the fifth lens and the sixth lens and in at least partial contact with the fifth lens, and the sixth spacing piece is placed between the sixth lens and the seventh lens and in at least partial contact with the sixth lens (fig. 2, L1-L7, FSs between lenses); a lens barrel, accommodating the optical lens group and the spacing piece group (fig. 1, 54; fig. 2, 54). But Kawasaki does not specifically disclose that wherein a maximal thickness CP6 of the sixth spacing piece along a direction of the optical axis is greater than a center thickness CT6 of the sixth lens on the optical axis, and an inner diameter d5s of an object-side surface of the fifth spacing piece, an inner diameter d6s of an object-side surface of the sixth spacing piece, and a spacing distance T56 between the fifth lens and the sixth lens on the optical axis satisfy: 4.5<(d6s-d5s)/T56<8.0. However, Song teaches an optical imaging lens assembly (abstract; figs. 1-5), Wherein a spacing piece group, comprising a fifth spacing piece and a sixth spacing piece, wherein the fifth spacing piece is placed between the fifth lens and the sixth lens and in at least partial contact with the fifth lens, and the sixth spacing piece is placed between the sixth lens and the seventh lens and in at least partial contact with the sixth lens (fig. 1, P5, P6, E5, E6, E7); a lens barrel, accommodating the optical lens group and the spacing piece group (fig. 1, lens barrel, lenses E1-E7, spacings P1-P7); wherein a maximal thickness CP6 of the sixth spacing piece along a direction of the optical axis is greater than a center thickness CT6 of the sixth lens on the optical axis (fig. 11, E6 and P6; fig. 13, E6 and P6), and an inner diameter d5s of an object-side surface of the fifth spacing piece, an inner diameter d6s of an object-side surface of the sixth spacing piece, and a spacing distance T56 between the fifth lens and the sixth lens on the optical axis satisfy: 4.5 < (d6s-d5s)/T56 < 8.0, (¶[0076], Table 1, given T56 = 0.2072; ¶[0077], Table 2-1, given d5s = 5.90, d6s = 7.54; so (d6s-d5s)/T56 = 7.92). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the imaging lens assembly of Kawasaki by the optical imaging lens assembly of Song for the purpose of providing of an optical imaging lens assembly having characteristics such as large image plane, good assembly stability, high light convergence ability and high imaging quality (¶[0068], line 1-20). Regarding Claim 4, Kawasaki - Song combination teaches that the optical imaging lens assembly according to claim 1, wherein the spacing piece group further comprises a second spacing piece and a third spacing piece, the second spacing piece is placed between the second lens and the third lens and in at least partial contact with the second lens, and the third spacing piece is placed between the third lens and the fourth lens and in at least partial contact with the third lens (fig. 1, P2, P3, E2, E3, E4, as disclosed in Song), wherein a spacing distance EP23 between an image-side surface of the second spacing piece and an object-side surface of the third spacing piece along the direction of the optical axis and a center thickness CT3 of the third lens on the optical axis satisfy: 1.0<EP23/CT3<2.0, (¶[0076], Table 1, given CT3 = 0.3456; ¶[0077], Table 2-2, given EP23 = 0.55; so EP23/CT3 = 1.59, as disclosed in Song). Regarding Claim 5, Kawasaki - Song combination teaches that the optical imaging lens assembly according to claim 1, wherein the spacing piece group further comprises a first spacing piece, and the first spacing piece is placed between the first lens and the second lens and in at least partial contact with the first lens (fig. 1, P1, E1, E2, as disclosed in Song), wherein a radius of curvature R1 of an object-side surface of the first lens, a radius of curvature R2 of an image-side surface of the first lens, and an inner diameter d1s of an object-side surface of the first spacing piece satisfy: 3.0<(R1+R2)/d1s<4.5, (¶[0076], Table 1, given R1 = 2.7591, R2 =20.0441; ¶[0077], Table 2-1, given ds1 = 5.30; so (R1+R2)/d1s = 4.30, as disclosed in Song). Regarding Claim 11, Kawasaki - Song combination teaches that the optical imaging lens assembly according to claim 1, wherein an inner diameter d5m of an image-side surface of the fifth spacing piece, the inner diameter d5s of the object-side surface of the fifth spacing piece, and a radius of curvature R11 of an object-side surface of the sixth lens satisfy: 0.15<(d5m-d5s)/R11<0.6, (¶[0076], Table 1, given R11 = 2.3383; ¶[0077], Table 2-1, given d5m = 6.56, d5s = 5.90; so (d5m-d5s)/R11= 0.28, as disclosed in Song). Regarding Claim 12, Kawasaki - Song combination teaches that the optical imaging lens assembly according to claim 1, wherein the inner diameter d5s of the object-side surface of the fifth spacing piece and a radius of curvature R11 of an object-side surface of the sixth lens satisfy: 2.0<d5s/R11<3.2, (¶[0076], Table 1, given R11 = 2.3383; ¶[0077], Table 2-1, given d5s = 5.90; so d5s/R11 = 2.52, as disclosed in Song). Regarding Claim 13, Kawasaki - Song combination teaches that the optical imaging lens assembly according to claim 1, wherein the maximal thickness CP6 of the sixth spacing piece along the direction of the optical axis, and a spacing distance T67 between the sixth lens and the seventh lens on the optical axis satisfy: 0.4<CP6/T67<0.7, (fig. 1, P6 and E6, E7; ---showing that CP6/T67 is about 0.5, as disclosed in Song). Regarding Claim 15, Kawasaki - Song combination teaches that the optical imaging lens assembly according to claim 1, wherein an inner diameter d0s of an object-side surface of the lens barrel, an inner diameter d0m of an image-side surface of the lens barrel, and an effective focal length f7 of the seventh lens satisfy: -1.5 <(d0m-d0s)/f7 < -1.2, (¶[0076], Table 1, f7 = - 4.93; ¶[0077], Table 2-2, given d0m = 10.57, d0s = 3.98; so (d0m-d0s)/f7 = -1.34, as disclosed in Song). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 2-3, 6-10 and 14 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for the allowable subject matter: The prior art taken singularly or in combination fails to anticipate or fairly suggest the limitations of the claims, in such a manner that a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102 or 103 would be proper. In regard to claims 2-3, 6-10 and 14, the prior art taken either singly or in combination fails to anticipate or fairly suggest an optical imaging lens assembly further comprising: wherein an inner diameter d4s of an object-side surface of the fourth spacing piece and a maximal effective radius DT42 of an image-side surface of the fourth lens satisfy: 2.0<d4s/DT42<2.8; wherein a spacing distance EP45 between an image-side surface of the fourth spacing piece and the object-side surface of the fifth spacing piece along the direction of the optical axis, an outer diameter D5s of the object-side surface of the fifth spacing piece, and an outer diameter D4m of the image-side surface of the fourth spacing piece satisfy: 0.1<EP45/(D5s-D4m)<0.6; wherein a spacing distance EP01 from an object-side end surface of the lens barrel to an object-side surface of the first spacing piece along the optical axis and an axial distance SAG11 from an intersection point of an object-side surface of the first lens and the optical axis to a projection point of an effective radius vertex of the object-side surface of the first lens onto the optical axis satisfy: 1.2<EP01/|SAG11|<2.0; wherein a spacing distance EP45 between an image-side surface of the fourth spacing piece and the object-side surface of the fifth spacing piece along the direction of the optical axis, and an axial distance SAG51 from an intersection point of an object-side surface of the fifth lens and the optical axis to a projection point of an effective radius vertex of the object-side surface of the fifth lens onto the optical axis, satisfy: 0.5<EP45/|SAG51|<1.3; wherein an outer diameter D4s of an object-side surface of the fourth spacing piece, a maximal effective radius DT32 of an image-side surface of the third lens, and a maximal thickness CP4 of the fourth spacing piece along the direction of the optical axis satisfy: 11<(D4s-DT32)/CP4<20.5; wherein an inner diameter d6m of an image-side surface of the sixth spacing piece, a radius of curvature R12 of an image-side surface of the sixth lens, an effective focal length f6 of the sixth lens, and the maximal thickness CP6 of the sixth spacing piece along the direction of the optical axis satisfy: 31<d6m/R12*(f6/CP6)<66; wherein the maximal thickness CP6 of the sixth spacing piece along the direction of the optical axis, a spacing distance T67 between the sixth lens and the seventh lens on the optical axis, an axial distance SAG71 from an intersection point of an object-side surface of the seventh lens and the optical axis to an effective radius vertex of the object-side surface of the seventh lens, and an axial distance SAG62 from an intersection point of an image-side surface of the sixth lens and the optical axis to a projection point of an effective radius vertex of the image-side surface of the sixth lens onto the optical axis satisfy: 1.0≤(T67-CP6)/(|SAG71|-|SAG62|)<1.6; and wherein a combined focal length f56 of the fifth lens and the sixth lens, a radius of curvature R12 of an image-side surface of the sixth lens, a center thickness CT5 of the fifth lens on the optical axis, and a maximal thickness CP5 of the fifth spacing piece along the direction of the optical axis satisfy: 1.3<f56/R12*(CP5/CT5)<3.8. Examiner’s Note Regarding the references, the Examiner cites particular figures, paragraphs, columns and line numbers in the reference(s), as applied to the claims above. Although the particular citations are representative teachings and are applied to specific limitations within the claims, other passages, internally cited references, and figures may also apply. In preparing a response, it is respectfully requested that the Applicant fully consider the references, in their entirety, as potentially disclosing or teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as fully consider the context of the passage as taught by the reference(s) or as disclosed by the Examiner. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communication from the examiner should be directed to Jie Lei whose telephone number is (571) 272 7231. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon.-Thurs. 8:00 am to 5:30 pm. If attempts to reach the examiner by the telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Stephone Allen can be reached on (571) 272 2434.The Fax number for the organization where this application 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 application 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 Services Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199(In USA or Canada) or 571-272-1000. /JIE LEI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 16, 2024
Application Filed
Sep 04, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12736809
WAVEGUIDE WITH DIFFRACTIVE OPTICAL ELEMENT
2y 8m to grant Granted Sep 15, 2026
Patent 12736719
LIGHT TRANSMISSIVE INJECTION MOLDED ARTICLE
2y 9m to grant Granted Sep 15, 2026
Patent 12729935
Viewing Instrument
6y 7m to grant Granted Sep 08, 2026
Patent 12730330
COLLIMATOR ARRAY AND FANOUT ARRAY
2y 10m to grant Granted Sep 08, 2026
Patent 12730302
DEFOGGING LENS BARREL STRUCTURE
2y 8m to grant Granted Sep 08, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
73%
Grant Probability
90%
With Interview (+16.6%)
2y 9m (~1y 0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 926 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month