Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/981,909

LENS APPARATUS, IMAGE PICKUP APPARATUS, CONTROL METHOD, AND STORAGE MEDIUM

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Dec 16, 2024
Examiner
MOREHEAD III, JOHN H
Art Unit
2639
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Canon Kabushiki Kaisha
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
86%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 4m
To Grant
98%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 86% — above average
86%
Career Allow Rate
506 granted / 590 resolved
+23.8% vs TC avg
Moderate +13% lift
Without
With
+12.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 4m
Avg Prosecution
25 currently pending
Career history
615
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.7%
-37.3% vs TC avg
§103
45.0%
+5.0% vs TC avg
§102
26.6%
-13.4% vs TC avg
§112
18.0%
-22.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 590 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
DETAILED ACTION Claims 1-17 are pending in the application. 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 . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 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)(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 1, 3, 7, 8, 13, 16, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Shimotsu et al (US 2023/0171474 A1). As per claim 1, Shimotsu discloses a lens apparatus (fig. 1, camera 10, lens barrel 11) attachable to and detachable from an image pickup apparatus (fig. 1, camera 10, main body 12), the lens apparatus comprising: a zoom lens including a focus lens configured to move for focusing, and a magnification varying lens configured to move for magnification variation (fig. 1, camera 10, lens barrel 11, zoom lens 27, focus lens 26); a processor (fig. 1, camera 10, control unit 45), configured to: perform a lens angle-of-view correction processing for driving the magnification varying lens to reduce an angle-of-view change of the zoom lens associated with movement of the focus lens (fig. 7, ST11, para 0073 and 0074), and change the lens angle-of-view correction processing according to whether or not an aberration correction processing for reducing an aberration of the zoom lens is performed for image data in the image pickup apparatus (fig. 7, ST10 and ST11, para 0073 and 0074). As per claim 3, Shimotsu further discloses the lens apparatus (fig. 1, camera 10, lens barrel 11) according to claim 1, wherein the processor (fig. 1, camera 10, control unit 45) is configured to: acquire, from the image pickup apparatus, information on whether or not the aberration correction processing is performed (fig. 7, ST10), and change the lens angle-of-view correction processing based on the information (fig. 7, ST11). As per claim 7, Shimotsu further discloses the lens apparatus (fig. 1, camera 10, lens barrel 11) according to claim 1, wherein the processor (fig. 1, camera 10, control unit 45) is configured to: perform the lens angle-of-view correction processing using correction data for driving the magnification varying lens (fig. 7, ST11), and change the correction data according to whether or not the aberration correction processing is performed in the image pickup apparatus (fig. 7, ST10, data is based on whether or not chromatic aberration has occurred or not). As per claim 8, Shimotsu further discloses the lens apparatus according to claim 7, further comprising a memory storing the correction data that is used in a case where the aberration correction processing is performed in the image pickup apparatus and the correction data that is used in a case where the aberration correction processing is not performed in the image pickup apparatus (figs. 1 and 3, camera 10, control unit 45, memory 66, storage 67, para 0060-0062). As per claim 13, Shimotsu further discloses the lens apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the zoom lens includes the focus lens in a lens unit disposed closest to an object (fig. 1, camera 10, lens barrel 11, zoom lens 27, focus lens 26). As per claim 16, Shimotsu further discloses a control method for a lens apparatus that is attachable to and detachable from an image pickup apparatus and includes a zoom lens including a focus lens configured to move for focusing and a magnification varying lens configured to move for magnification variation, the control method comprising: performing a lens angle-of-view correction processing for driving the magnification varying lens to reduce an angle-of-view change of the zoom lens associated with movement of the focus lens, and changing the lens angle-of-view correction processing according to whether or not an aberration correction processing for reducing an aberration of the zoom lens is performed for image data in the image pickup apparatus (claim limitations have been discussed and rejected, see claim 1 above). As per claim 17, Shimotsu further discloses a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing a program that causes a computer to execute the control method according to claim 16 (para 0060). 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 2, 4, 5, 12, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shimotsu et al (US 2023/0171474 A1) in view of Sugimoto et al (US 2024/0259672 A1). As per claim 2, The lens apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the aberration includes distortion. Shimotsu fails to teach the claim limitations as recited above in claim 2. However, Sugimoto discloses a camera 2, wherein digital distortion correction is performed on the captured image data (Sugimoto, fig. 2, camera 2, control unit 20, para 0075 and 0076). 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 teachings of Shimotsu in view of Sugimoto, as a whole, by incorporating the ability to correct distortion as taught by Sugimoto, into the camera as taught by Shimotsu, because doing so would provide a more efficient way of correcting distortion in an image, thus being able to enhance the picture quality of the image(s) being captured. As per claim 4, the lens apparatus according to claim 1, further comprising a setting unit configured to enable a user to perform a setting of whether or not the image pickup apparatus performs the aberration correction processing, wherein the processor is configured to change the lens angle-of-view correction processing according to the setting. Shimotsu fails to teach the claim limitations as recited above in claim 4. However, Sugimoto discloses a camera 2 including a setting screen 52 which disables a correction based on the image/video being captured (Sugimoto, fig. 13, camera 2, video correction setting 52, para 0077). 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 teachings of Shimotsu in view of Sugimoto, as a whole, by incorporating the ability to disable a function (i.e. correction) of a camera as taught by Sugimoto, into the camera as taught by Shimotsu, because doing so would provide a more efficient way of choosing correction type, thus enhancing the image/video data being captured. As per claim 5, the lens apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the processor is configured to change the lens angle-of-view correction processing according to an imaging area in the image pickup apparatus. Shimotsu fails to teach the claim limitations as recited above in claim 5. However, Sugimoto discloses a camera 2 wherein angle-of-view correction is performed based on an imaging area (Sugimoto, fig. 8, camera 2, zoomed area R1). 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 teachings of Shimotsu in view of Sugimoto, as a whole, by incorporating the ability to perform angle-of-view correction based on an imaging area as taught by Sugimoto, into the camera as taught by Shimotsu, because doing so would provide a more efficient way of performing correction via a imaging area, thus enhancing imaging/video as a whole. As per claim 12, the combined teachings of Shimotsu in view of Sugimoto, as a whole, further discloses the lens apparatus according to claim 1, wherein in a case where the image pickup apparatus can capture a still image and a moving image, the processor is configured to perform the lens angle-of-view correction processing only while the moving image is being captured by the image pickup apparatus (Sugimoto, para 0053). As per claim 15, the combined teachings of Shimotsu in view of Sugimoto, as a whole, further discloses an image pickup apparatus to which the lens apparatus according to claim 1 is detachably attachable, and in which the aberration correction processing can be set to be enabled or disabled (Shimotsu, fig. 1, camera 10, lens barrel 11 may be attached/detached and Sugimoto, fig. 13, camera 2, video correction setting 52, para 0077). Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shimotsu et al (US 2023/0171474 A1) in view of Sakamoto (US 2016/0062092 A1). As per claim 14, the lens apparatus according to claim 13, wherein the lens unit disposed closest to the object has positive refractive power, and the focus lens moves toward an object side during focusing from infinity to a close distance. Shimotsu fails to teach the limitations as recited above in claim 14. However, Sakamoto discloses a zoom lens unit having a positive refractive power and the ability to focus lens at an object distance to infinity (Sakamoto, fig. 1, first lens unit, para 0051 and 0052). 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 teachings of Shimotsu in view of Sakamoto, as a whole, by incorporating the lens properties as taught by Sakamoto, into the camera as taught by Shimotsu, because doing so would provide a more efficient way to zoom/focus in on an image. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 6 and 9-11 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 a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Regarding Claim 6, none of the prior art cited alone or in combination provides the motivation to teach the following claimed limitations, with emphasis that it is each claim, taken as a whole, including the interrelationships and interconnections between various claimed elements make them allowable over the prior art of record, the lens apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the zoom lens further includes an optical unit configured to change a focal length range of the zoom lens, and insertable into and ejectable from an optical axis of the zoom lens, and wherein the processor is configured to change the lens angle-of-view correction processing according to whether the optical unit is inserted or ejected. Regarding Claim 9, none of the prior art cited alone or in combination provides the motivation to teach the following claimed limitations, with emphasis that it is each claim, taken as a whole, including the interrelationships and interconnections between various claimed elements make them allowable over the prior art of record, the lens apparatus according to claim 7, further comprising a memory storing first data as the correction data that is used for one of a case where the aberration correction processing is performed in the image pickup apparatus and a case where the aberration correction processing is not performed in the image pickup apparatus, and second data for generating the correction data that is used in another case by combining the first data. Regarding claim 10, claim depend from claim 9, an is allowable for the same reasons stated above. Regarding claim 11, none of the prior art cited alone or in combination provides the motivation to teach the following claimed limitations, with emphasis that it is each claim, taken as a whole, including the interrelationships and interconnections between various claimed elements make them allowable over the prior art of record, the lens apparatus according to claim 1, wherein in a case where the image pickup apparatus can perform an image angle-of-view correction processing for correcting the angle-of-view change for the image data, the processor is configured to perform the lens angle-of-view correction processing only in a case where the image angle-of-view correction processing is not performed in the image pickup apparatus. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN H MOREHEAD III whose telephone number is (571)270-3845. The examiner can normally be reached M - F 0930-1800 EST. 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, Twyler Haskins can be reached at (571) 272-7406. 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. /JOHN H MOREHEAD III/Examiner, Art Unit 2639 /TWYLER L HASKINS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2639
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 16, 2024
Application Filed
Mar 21, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12585174
DIGITAL PROJECTOR, MACHINE TOOL, AND PROJECTED IMAGE DISPLAY METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12574623
CAMERA MODULE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12549692
NOTIFICATION METHOD AND NOTIFICATION SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12538635
SOLID-STATE IMAGING ELEMENT AND ELECTRONIC APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 27, 2026
Patent 12527103
PHOTOELECTRIC CONVERSION APPARATUS AND EQUIPMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 13, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
86%
Grant Probability
98%
With Interview (+12.6%)
2y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 590 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow 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