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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 11 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 11 recites the limitation "the first spacing element" in the second line. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purposes of examination, examiner will assume “[[the]] a first spacing element”.
Claim 17 recites the limitation "the fourth spacing element" in the second line. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purposes of examination, examiner will assume “[[the]] a fourth spacing element”.
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.
Claim(s) 1-12, 15-16, and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Asami et al. (US 20160011403 A1), hereinafter Asami, in view of Son et al. (US 20190391365 A1), hereinafter Son.
Regarding independent claim 1, Asami discloses an optical photography lens assembly, comprising a lens barrel having an accommodation space (¶0012), and a lens group (Example 2: Fig. 3; Table 2) accommodated within the lens barrel (¶0012),
the lens group (Fig. 3) comprises: a first lens having a refractive power (L1; Fig. 3; Table 2), a second lens having a refractive power (L2; Fig. 3; Table 2), a third lens having a refractive power (L3; Fig. 3; Table 2), a fourth lens having a refractive power (L4; Fig. 3; Table 2), a fifth lens having a refractive power (L5; Fig. 3; Table 2), and a sixth lens having a refractive power (L6; Fig. 3; Table 2), disposed sequentially along an optical axis from an object side to an image side (Fig. 3; Table 2);
wherein, a radius of curvature R5 of an object-side surface of the third lens (L3) and a radius of curvature R6 of an image-side surface of the third lens (L3) satisfy: 1.5 < R6/R5 < 2.0 (R6/R5 = 1.9; Table 2).
Asami does not explicitly disclose at least one spacing element accommodated within the lens barrel, wherein, the at least one spacing element comprises a third spacing element disposed between the third lens and the fourth lens and in direct contact with an image side of the third lens; and an effective focal length f3 of the third lens and an inner diameter d3s of an object-side surface of the third spacing element satisfy: 3.2 < f3/d3s < 4.2.
However, Son teaches a similar optical photography lens assembly (100; Fig. 21) comprising a lens barrel (200; Fig. 21; ¶0165) having an accommodation space, and a lens group (100) and at least one spacing element (SP1-SP8; Fig. 21; ¶0165) accommodated within the lens barrel (200) (Fig. 21; ¶0165) wherein, the lens group (100) comprises: a first lens having a refractive power (1000; Fig. 21), a second lens having a refractive power (2000; Fig. 21), a third lens having a refractive power (3000; Fig. 21), a fourth lens having a refractive power (4000; Fig. 21), a fifth lens having a refractive power (5000; Fig. 21), and a sixth lens having a refractive power (6000; Fig. 21), disposed sequentially along an optical axis from an object side to an image side (Fig. 21); the at least one spacing element (SP1-SP8) comprises a third spacing element (SP3; Fig. 21; ¶0165) disposed between the third lens (3000) and the fourth lens (4000) and in direct contact with an image side of the third lens (3000) (Fig. 21). One would be motivated to modify Asami to incorporate the at least one spacing element of Son for the purpose of maintaining a predetermined distance between two adjacent lenses and blocking extraneous light penetrating into the ribs of the lenses (¶0069 of Son).
Neither Asami nor Son explicitly disclose an effective focal length f3 of the third lens and an inner diameter d3s of an object-side surface of the third spacing element satisfy: 3.2 < f3/d3s < 4.2.
However, 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), see MPEP 2144.05. In this case Asami in view of Son has all the claimed elements of an optical photography lens assembly, fulfilling the general conditions of the claim. Asami further discloses f3 is positive (Fig. 3; Table 2), which is necessary to satisfy the above expression. One would be motivated to have the optical photography lens assembly satisfy 3.2 < f3/d3s < 4.2 for the purpose of having the proper aperture size to achieve the intended optical properties by blocking extraneous light penetrating into the ribs of the lenses (¶0069 of Son).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Asami to incorporate the spacing element of Son for the purpose of maintaining a predetermined distance between two adjacent lenses and blocking extraneous light penetrating into the ribs of the lenses (¶0069 of Son) and to have the optical photography lens assembly satisfy 3.2 < f3/d3s < 4.2 for the purpose of having the proper aperture size to achieve the intended optical properties by blocking extraneous light penetrating into the ribs of the lenses (¶0069 of Son).
Regarding claim 2, Asami in view of Son discloses the optical photography lens assembly according to claim 1, including the at least one spacing element, as set forth above. Son further teaches the at least one spacing element (SP1-SP8) further comprises a fifth spacing element (SP5; Fig. 21; ¶0165) disposed between the fifth lens (5000) and the sixth lens (6000) and in direct contact with an image side of the fifth lens (5000) (Fig. 21).
Neither Asami nor Son explicitly disclose a radius of curvature R10 of an image-side surface of the fifth lens, a refractive index N5 of the fifth lens, and an inner diameter d5s of an object-side surface of the fifth spacing element satisfy: -75.0 < R10*N5/d5s < -18.0.
However, 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), see MPEP 2144.05. In this case Asami in view of Son has all the claimed elements of an optical photography lens assembly, fulfilling the general conditions of the claim. Asami further discloses R10 is negative (Fig. 3; Table 2), which is necessary to satisfy the above expression. One would be motivated to have the optical photography lens assembly satisfy -75.0 < R10*N5/d5s < -18.0 for the purpose of having the proper aperture size to achieve the intended optical properties by blocking extraneous light penetrating into the ribs of the lenses (¶0069 of Son).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the optical photography lens assembly satisfy -75.0 < R10*N5/d5s < -18.0 for the purpose of having the proper aperture size to achieve the intended optical properties by blocking extraneous light penetrating into the ribs of the lenses (¶0069 of Son).
Regarding claim 3, Asami in view of Son discloses the optical photography lens assembly according to claim 1, including the at least one spacing element, as set forth above. Son further teaches the at least one spacing element (SP1-SP8) further comprises a first spacing element (SP1; Fig. 21; ¶0165) disposed between the first lens (1000) and the second lens (2000) and in direct contact with an image side of the first lens (1000) (Fig. 21).
Neither Asami nor Son explicitly disclose a spacing EP01 between a front-end surface of the lens barrel and the first spacing element, a center thickness CT1 of the first lens on the optical axis and a center thickness CT2 of the second lens on the optical axis satisfy: 3.5 < (EP01+CT2)/CT1 < 5.0.
However, 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), see MPEP 2144.05. In this case Asami in view of Son has all the claimed elements of an optical photography lens assembly, fulfilling the general conditions of the claim. One would be motivated to have the optical photography lens assembly satisfy 3.5 < (EP01+CT2)/CT1 < 5.0 for the purpose of mounting the lenses in the lens barrel so that they are spaced apart from one another by predetermined distances (¶0065 of Son) to achieve the intended optical and mechanical properties.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the optical photography lens assembly satisfy 3.5 < (EP01+CT2)/CT1 < 5.0 for the purpose of mounting the lenses in the lens barrel so that they are spaced apart from one another by predetermined distances (¶0065 of Son) to achieve the intended optical and mechanical properties.
Regarding claim 4, Asami in view of Son discloses the optical photography lens assembly according to claim 1, including the at least one spacing element, as set forth above. Asami further discloses a center thickness CT1 of the first lens (L1) on the optical axis and a center thickness CT2 of the second lens (L2) on the optical axis satisfy: 1.4 < CT2/CT1 ≤ 2.3 (CT2/CT1 = 1.8; Table 2). Son further teaches wherein the at least one spacing element (SP1-SP8) further comprises a first spacing element (SP1; Fig. 21; ¶0165) disposed between the first lens (1000) and the second lens (2000) and in direct contact with an image side of the first lens (1000) (Fig. 21), and a second spacing element (SP2; Fig. 21; ¶0165) disposed between the second lens (2000) and the third lens (3000) and in direct contact with an image side of the second lens (2000) (Fig. 21).
Neither Asami nor Son explicitly disclose a spacing EP12 between the first spacing element and the second spacing element and a center thickness CT2 of the second lens on the optical axis satisfy: 0.9 < EP12/CT2 < 1.1.
However, 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), see MPEP 2144.05. In this case Asami in view of Son has all the claimed elements of an optical photography lens assembly, fulfilling the general conditions of the claim. One would be motivated to have the optical photography lens assembly satisfy 0.9 < EP12/CT2 < 1.1 for the purpose of mounting the lenses in the lens barrel so that they are spaced apart from one another by predetermined distances (¶0065 of Son) to achieve the intended optical and mechanical properties.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the optical photography lens assembly satisfy 0.9 < EP12/CT2 < 1.1 for the purpose of mounting the lenses in the lens barrel so that they are spaced apart from one another by predetermined distances (¶0065 of Son) to achieve the intended optical and mechanical properties.
Regarding claim 5, Asami in view of Son discloses the optical photography lens assembly according to claim 1, including the at least one spacing element, as set forth above. Son further teaches the at least one spacing element (SP1-SP8) further comprises a second spacing element (SP2; Fig. 21; ¶0165) disposed between the second lens (2000) and the third lens (3000) and in direct contact with an image side of the second lens (2000) (Fig. 21).
Neither Asami nor Son explicitly disclose an effective focal length f2 of the second lens, a refractive index N2 of the second lens and an inner diameter d2s of an object-side surface of the second spacing element satisfy: 5.5 < f2*N2/d2s < 6.5.
However, 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), see MPEP 2144.05. In this case Asami in view of Son has all the claimed elements of an optical photography lens assembly, fulfilling the general conditions of the claim. Asami further discloses f2 is positive (Fig. 3; Table 2), which is necessary to satisfy the above expression. One would be motivated to have the optical photography lens assembly satisfy 5.5 < f2*N2/d2s < 6.5 for the purpose of having the proper aperture size to achieve the intended optical properties by blocking extraneous light penetrating into the ribs of the lenses (¶0069 of Son).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the optical photography lens assembly satisfy 5.5 < f2*N2/d2s < 6.5 for the purpose of having the proper aperture size to achieve the intended optical properties by blocking extraneous light penetrating into the ribs of the lenses (¶0069 of Son).
Regarding claim 6, Asami in view of Son discloses the optical photography lens assembly according to claim 1, including the at least one spacing element, as set forth above. Son further teaches the at least one spacing element (SP1-SP8) further comprises a second spacing element (SP2; Fig. 21; ¶0165) disposed between the second lens (2000) and the third lens (3000) and in direct contact with an image side of the second lens (2000) (Fig. 21).
Neither Asami nor Son explicitly disclose a combined focal length f12 of the first lens and the second lens, an outer diameter D2m of an image-side surface of the second spacing element, and an inner diameter d2m of the image-side surface of the second spacing element satisfy: 7.0 < f12/(D2m-d2m) < 17.5.
However, 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), see MPEP 2144.05. In this case Asami in view of Son has all the claimed elements of an optical photography lens assembly, fulfilling the general conditions of the claim. Asami further discloses f12 is positive (Fig. 3; Table 2), which is necessary to satisfy the above expression. One would be motivated to have the optical photography lens assembly satisfy 7.0 < f12/(D2m-d2m) < 17.5 for the purpose of fitting the spacing element between the lenses such that the optical axes of the lenses can be easily aligned with the optical axis of the optical system (¶0065 of Son) and having the proper aperture size to achieve the intended optical properties by blocking extraneous light penetrating into the ribs of the lenses (¶0069 of Son).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the optical photography lens assembly satisfy 7.0 < f12/(D2m-d2m) < 17.5 for the purpose of fitting the spacing element between the lenses such that the optical axes of the lenses can be easily aligned with the optical axis of the optical system (¶0065 of Son) and having the proper aperture size to achieve the intended optical properties by blocking extraneous light penetrating into the ribs of the lenses (¶0069 of Son).
Regarding claim 7, Asami in view of Son discloses the optical photography lens assembly according to claim 1, including the at least one spacing element, as set forth above. Son further teaches the at least one spacing element (SP1-SP8) further comprises a second spacing element (SP2; Fig. 21; ¶0165) disposed between the second lens (2000) and the third lens (3000) and in direct contact with an image side of the second lens (2000) (Fig. 21).
Neither Asami nor Son explicitly disclose an air spacing T23 between the second lens and the third lens on the optical axis, an air spacing T34 between the third lens and the fourth lens on the optical axis, a center thickness CT3 of the third lens on the optical axis, and a spacing EP23 between the second spacing element and the third spacing element satisfy: 1.5 < (T23+CT3+T34)/EP23 < 2.0.
However, 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), see MPEP 2144.05. In this case Asami in view of Son has all the claimed elements of an optical photography lens assembly, fulfilling the general conditions of the claim. One would be motivated to have the optical photography lens assembly satisfy 1.5 < (T23+CT3+T34)/EP23 < 2.0 for the purpose of mounting the lenses in the lens barrel so that they are spaced apart from one another by predetermined distances (¶0065 of Son) to achieve the intended optical and mechanical properties.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the optical photography lens assembly satisfy 1.5 < (T23+CT3+T34)/EP23 < 2.0 for the purpose of mounting the lenses in the lens barrel so that they are spaced apart from one another by predetermined distances (¶0065 of Son) to achieve the intended optical and mechanical properties.
Regarding claim 8, Asami in view of Son discloses the optical photography lens assembly according to claim 1, including the at least one spacing element, as set forth above. Son further teaches the at least one spacing element (SP1-SP8) further comprises a fourth spacing element (SP4; Fig. 21; ¶0165) disposed between the fourth lens (4000) and the fifth lens (5000) and in direct contact with an image side of the fourth lens (4000) (Fig. 21), and a fifth spacing element (SP5; Fig. 21; ¶0165) disposed between the fifth lens (5000) and the sixth lens (6000) and in direct contact with an image side of the fifth lens (5000) (Fig. 21).
Neither Asami nor Son explicitly disclose a spacing EP45 between the fourth spacing element and the fifth spacing element, a maximal thickness CP5 of the fifth spacing element, and a center thickness CT5 of the fifth lens on the optical axis satisfy: 1.5 < (EP45+CP5)/CT5 < 2.5.
However, 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), see MPEP 2144.05. In this case Asami in view of Son has all the claimed elements of an optical photography lens assembly, fulfilling the general conditions of the claim. One would be motivated to have the optical photography lens assembly satisfy 1.5 < (EP45+CP5)/CT5 < 2.5 for the purpose of mounting the lenses in the lens barrel so that they are spaced apart from one another by predetermined distances (¶0065 of Son) to achieve the intended optical and mechanical properties.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the optical photography lens assembly satisfy 1.5 < (EP45+CP5)/CT5 < 2.5 for the purpose of mounting the lenses in the lens barrel so that they are spaced apart from one another by predetermined distances (¶0065 of Son) to achieve the intended optical and mechanical properties.
Regarding claim 9, Asami in view of Son discloses the optical photography lens assembly according to claim 1, including the at least one spacing element, as set forth above. Son further teaches the at least one spacing element (SP1-SP8) further comprises a fifth spacing element (SP5; Fig. 21; ¶0165) disposed between the fifth lens (5000) and the sixth lens (6000) and in direct contact with an image side of the fifth lens (5000) (Fig. 21; ¶0165), and a sixth spacing element (SP6; Fig. 21; ¶0165) disposed an image side of the sixth lens (6000) and in direct contact with the image side of the sixth lens (6000) (Fig. 21).
Neither Asami nor Son explicitly disclose an air spacing T56 between the fifth lens and the sixth lens on the optical axis and a spacing EP56 between the fifth spacing element and the sixth spacing element satisfy: 0.9 < T56/EP56 < 2.1.
However, 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), see MPEP 2144.05. In this case Asami in view of Son has all the claimed elements of an optical photography lens assembly, fulfilling the general conditions of the claim. One would be motivated to have the optical photography lens assembly satisfy 0.9 < T56/EP56 < 2.1 for the purpose of mounting the lenses in the lens barrel so that they are spaced apart from one another by predetermined distances (¶0065 of Son) to achieve the intended optical and mechanical properties.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the optical photography lens assembly satisfy 0.9 < T56/EP56 < 2.1 for the purpose of mounting the lenses in the lens barrel so that they are spaced apart from one another by predetermined distances (¶0065 of Son) to achieve the intended optical and mechanical properties.
Regarding claim 10, Asami in view of Son discloses the optical photography lens assembly according to claim 1, including the at least one spacing element, as set forth above. Son further teaches the at least one spacing element (SP1-SP8) further comprises a first spacing element (SP1; Fig. 21; ¶0165) disposed between the first lens (1000) and the second lens (2000) and in direct contact with an image side of the first lens (1000) (Fig. 21).
Neither Asami nor Son explicitly disclose a radius of curvature R1 of an object-side surface of the first lens, an inner diameter d1s of an object-side surface of the first spacing element, and an inner diameter d1m of an image-side surface of the first spacing element satisfy: 31.0 < R1/(d1s-d1m) < 33.5.
However, 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), see MPEP 2144.05. In this case Asami in view of Son has all the claimed elements of an optical photography lens assembly, fulfilling the general conditions of the claim. One would be motivated to have the optical photography lens assembly satisfy 31.0 < R1/(d1s-d1m) < 33.5 for the purpose of having the proper aperture size to achieve the intended optical properties by blocking extraneous light penetrating into the ribs of the lenses (¶0069 of Son).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the optical photography lens assembly satisfy 31.0 < R1/(d1s-d1m) < 33.5 for the purpose of having the proper aperture size to achieve the intended optical properties by blocking extraneous light penetrating into the ribs of the lenses (¶0069 of Son).
Regarding claim 11, Asami in view of Son discloses the optical photography lens assembly according to claim 1, including the at least one spacing element, as set forth above. Son further teaches the at least one spacing element (SP1-SP8) further comprises the first spacing element (SP1; Fig. 21; ¶0165) disposed between the first lens (1000) and the second lens (2000) and in direct contact with the image side of the first lens (1000) (Fig. 21), and a second spacing element (SP2; Fig. 21; ¶0165) disposed between the second lens (2000) and the third lens (3000) and in direct contact with an image side of the second lens (2000) (Fig. 21).
Neither Asami nor Son explicitly disclose a spacing EP12 between the first spacing element and the second spacing element and the spacing EP01 between the front-end surface of the lens barrel and the first spacing element satisfy: 0.5 < EP12/EP01 < 1.0.
However, 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), see MPEP 2144.05. In this case Asami in view of Son has all the claimed elements of an optical photography lens assembly, fulfilling the general conditions of the claim. One would be motivated to have the optical photography lens assembly satisfy 0.5 < EP12/EP01 < 1.0 for the purpose of mounting the lenses in the lens barrel so that they are spaced apart from one another by predetermined distances (¶0065 of Son) to achieve the intended optical and mechanical properties.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the optical photography lens assembly satisfy 0.5 < EP12/EP01 < 1.0 for the purpose of mounting the lenses in the lens barrel so that they are spaced apart from one another by predetermined distances (¶0065 of Son) to achieve the intended optical and mechanical properties.
Regarding claim 12, Asami in view of Son discloses the optical photography lens assembly according to claim 1, including the at least one spacing element, as set forth above. Son further teaches the at least one spacing element (SP1-SP8) further comprises a fourth spacing element (SP4; Fig. 21; ¶0165) disposed between the fourth lens (4000) and the fifth lens (5000) and in direct contact with an image side of the fourth lens (4000) (Fig. 21).
Neither Asami nor Son explicitly disclose a radius of curvature R7 of an object-side surface of the fourth lens, a radius of curvature R8 of an image-side surface of the fourth lens, an outer diameter D4s of an object-side surface of the fourth spacing element, and an outer diameter D4m of an image-side surface of the fourth spacing element satisfy: 1.5 < D4s/R7 + D4m/R8 ≤ 2.5.
However, 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), see MPEP 2144.05. In this case Asami in view of Son has all the claimed elements of an optical photography lens assembly, fulfilling the general conditions of the claim. Asami further discloses at least one of R7 and R8 is positive (Fig. 3; Table 2), which is necessary to satisfy the above expression. One would be motivated to have the optical photography lens assembly satisfy 1.5 < D4s/R7 + D4m/R8 ≤ 2.5 for the purpose of properly fitting the lens and the spacing elements into the lens barrel and fitting the spacing element between the lenses such that the optical axes of the lenses can be easily aligned with the optical axis of the optical system (¶0065 of Son).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the optical photography lens assembly satisfy 1.5 < D4s/R7 + D4m/R8 ≤ 2.5 for the purpose of properly fitting the lens and the spacing elements into the lens barrel and fitting the spacing element between the lenses such that the optical axes of the lenses can be easily aligned with the optical axis of the optical system (¶0065 of Son).
Regarding claim 15, Asami in view of Son discloses the optical photography lens assembly according to claim 1, as set forth above. Asami further discloses a maximal height L of the lens barrel (¶0012) along a direction of the optical axis and a sum of center thicknesses ∑CT of all lenses in the lens group (Fig. 3) on the optical axis satisfy: 1.6 < L/∑CT < 1.8 (L is being approximated as the total track length TTL, therefore L/∑CT = 1.78; Fig. 3; Table 2).
Regarding claim 16, Asami in view of Son discloses the optical photography lens assembly according to claim 1, including the at least one spacing element comprising the third spacing element, as set forth above.
Neither Asami nor Son explicitly disclose an outer diameter D3s of the object-side surface of the third spacing element, the radius of curvature R5 of the object-side surface of the third lens, the radius of curvature R6 of the image-side surface of the third lens, and an outer diameter D3m of an image-side surface of the third spacing element satisfy: 1.7 < D3s/R5 + D3m/R6 < 2.9.
However, 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), see MPEP 2144.05. In this case Asami in view of Son has all the claimed elements of an optical photography lens assembly, fulfilling the general conditions of the claim. Asami further discloses at least one of R5 and R6 is positive (Fig. 3; Table 2), which is necessary to satisfy the above expression. One would be motivated to have the optical photography lens assembly satisfy 1.7 < D3s/R5 + D3m/R6 < 2.9 for the purpose of properly fitting the lens and the spacing elements into the lens barrel and fitting the spacing element between the lenses such that the optical axes of the lenses can be easily aligned with the optical axis of the optical system (¶0065 of Son).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the optical photography lens assembly satisfy 1.7 < D3s/R5 + D3m/R6 < 2.9 for the purpose of properly fitting the lens and the spacing elements into the lens barrel and fitting the spacing element between the lenses such that the optical axes of the lenses can be easily aligned with the optical axis of the optical system (¶0065 of Son).
Regarding claim 18, Asami in view of Son discloses the optical photography lens assembly according to claim 1, including the at least one spacing element, as set forth above. Son further teaches the at least one spacing element (SP1-SP8) further comprises a fifth spacing element (SP5; Fig. 21; ¶0165) disposed between the fifth lens (5000) and the sixth lens (6000) and in direct contact with an image side of the fifth lens (5000) (Fig. 21).
Neither Asami nor Son explicitly disclose a combined focal length f56 of the fifth lens and the sixth lens and an outer diameter D5m of an image-side surface of the fifth spacing element satisfy: 0.8 < f56/D5m < 2.4.
However, 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), see MPEP 2144.05. In this case Asami in view of Son has all the claimed elements of an optical photography lens assembly, fulfilling the general conditions of the claim. Asami further discloses f56 is positive (Fig. 3; Table 2), which is necessary to satisfy the above expression. One would be motivated to have the optical photography lens assembly satisfy 0.8 < f56/D5m < 2.4 for the purpose of properly fitting the lens and the spacing elements into the lens barrel and fitting the spacing element between the lenses such that the optical axes of the lenses can be easily aligned with the optical axis of the optical system (¶0065 of Son).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the optical photography lens assembly satisfy 0.8 < f56/D5m < 2.4 for the purpose of properly fitting the lens and the spacing elements into the lens barrel and fitting the spacing element between the lenses such that the optical axes of the lenses can be easily aligned with the optical axis of the optical system (¶0065 of Son).
Regarding claim 19, Asami in view of Son discloses the optical photography lens assembly according to claim 1, including the at least one spacing element, as set forth above. Son further teaches the at least one spacing element (SP1-SP8) further comprises a fifth spacing element (SP5; Fig. 21; ¶0165) disposed between the fifth lens (5000) and the sixth lens (6000) and in direct contact with an image side of the fifth lens (5000).
Neither Asami nor Son explicitly disclose an effective focal length f5 of the fifth lens, a radius of curvature R10 of an image-side surface of the fifth lens, and an inner diameter d5s of an object-side surface of the fifth spacing element satisfy: 1.1 < f5/R10 + f5/d5s < 3.0.
However, 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), see MPEP 2144.05. In this case Asami in view of Son has all the claimed elements of an optical photography lens assembly, fulfilling the general conditions of the claim. One would be motivated to have the optical photography lens assembly satisfy 1.1 < f5/R10 + f5/d5s < 3.0 for the purpose of properly fitting the lens and the spacing elements into the lens barrel and fitting the spacing element between the lenses such that the optical axes of the lenses can be easily aligned with the optical axis of the optical system (¶0065 of Son).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the optical photography lens assembly satisfy 1.1 < f5/R10 + f5/d5s < 3.0 for the purpose of properly fitting the lens and the spacing elements into the lens barrel and fitting the spacing element between the lenses such that the optical axes of the lenses can be easily aligned with the optical axis of the optical system (¶0065 of Son).
Claim(s) 1-3 and 6-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou et al. (US 20220146793 A1), hereinafter Zhou, in view of Son (US 20190391365 A1).
Regarding independent claim 1, Zhou discloses an optical photography lens assembly, comprising a lens barrel having an accommodation space (implicit that there would be a lens barrel to hold the lenses), and a lens group (Embodiment 2: Fig. 3; Table 4) accommodated within the lens barrel, wherein,
the lens group (Fig. 3) comprises: a first lens having a refractive power (E1; Fig. 3; Table 4), a second lens having a refractive power (E2; Fig. 3; Table 4), a third lens having a refractive power (E3; Fig. 3; Table 4), a fourth lens having a refractive power (E4; Fig. 3; Table 4), a fifth lens having a refractive power (Version 1: E8 or Version 2: E5; Fig. 3; Table 4), and a sixth lens having a refractive power (Version 1: E9 or Version 2: E6; Fig. 3; Table 4), disposed sequentially along an optical axis from an object side to an image side (Fig. 3; Table 4);
wherein, a radius of curvature R5 of an object-side surface of the third lens (E3) and a radius of curvature R6 of an image-side surface of the third lens (E3) satisfy: 1.5 < R6/R5 < 2.0 (R6/R5 = 1.6; Table 4).
Zhou does not explicitly disclose at least one spacing element accommodated within the lens barrel, wherein, the at least one spacing element comprises a third spacing element disposed between the third lens and the fourth lens and in direct contact with an image side of the third lens; and an effective focal length f3 of the third lens and an inner diameter d3s of an object-side surface of the third spacing element satisfy: 3.2 < f3/d3s < 4.2.
However, Son teaches a similar optical photography lens assembly (100; Fig. 21) comprising a lens barrel (200; Fig. 21; ¶0165) having an accommodation space, and a lens group (100) and at least one spacing element (SP1-SP8; Fig. 21; ¶0165) accommodated within the lens barrel (200) (Fig. 21; ¶0165) wherein, the lens group (100) comprises: a first lens having a refractive power (1000; Fig. 21), a second lens having a refractive power (2000; Fig. 21), a third lens having a refractive power (3000; Fig. 21), a fourth lens having a refractive power (4000; Fig. 21), a fifth lens having a refractive power (5000; Fig. 21), and a sixth lens having a refractive power (6000; Fig. 21), disposed sequentially along an optical axis from an object side to an image side (Fig. 21); the at least one spacing element (SP1-SP8) comprises a third spacing element (SP3; Fig. 21; ¶0165) disposed between the third lens (3000) and the fourth lens (4000) and in direct contact with an image side of the third lens (3000) (Fig. 21). One would be motivated to modify Zhou to incorporate the at least one spacing element of Son for the purpose of maintaining a predetermined distance between two adjacent lenses and blocking extraneous light penetrating into the ribs of the lenses (¶0069 of Son).
Neither Zhou nor Son explicitly disclose an effective focal length f3 of the third lens and an inner diameter d3s of an object-side surface of the third spacing element satisfy: 3.2 < f3/d3s < 4.2.
However, 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), see MPEP 2144.05. In this case Zhou in view of Son has all the claimed elements of an optical photography lens assembly, fulfilling the general conditions of the claim. Zhou further discloses f3 is positive (Versions 1 and 2; Fig. 3; Table 4), which is necessary to satisfy the above expression. One would be motivated to have the optical photography lens assembly satisfy 3.2 < f3/d3s < 4.2 for the purpose of having the proper aperture size to achieve the intended optical properties by blocking extraneous light penetrating into the ribs of the lenses (¶0069 of Son).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Zhou to incorporate the spacing element of Son for the purpose of maintaining a predetermined distance between two adjacent lenses and blocking extraneous light penetrating into the ribs of the lenses (¶0069 of Son) and to have the optical photography lens assembly satisfy 3.2 < f3/d3s < 4.2 for the purpose of having the proper aperture size to achieve the intended optical properties by blocking extraneous light penetrating into the ribs of the lenses (¶0069 of Son).
Regarding claim 2, Zhou in view of Son discloses the optical photography lens assembly according to claim 1, including the at least one spacing element, as set forth above. Son further teaches the at least one spacing element (SP1-SP8) further comprises a fifth spacing element (SP5; Fig. 21; ¶0165) disposed between the fifth lens (5000) and the sixth lens (6000) and in direct contact with an image side of the fifth lens (5000) (Fig. 21).
Neither Zhou nor Son explicitly disclose a radius of curvature R10 of an image-side surface of the fifth lens, a refractive index N5 of the fifth lens, and an inner diameter d5s of an object-side surface of the fifth spacing element satisfy: -75.0 < R10*N5/d5s < -18.0.
However, 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), see MPEP 2144.05. In this case Zhou in view of Son has all the claimed elements of an optical photography lens assembly, fulfilling the general conditions of the claim. Zhou further discloses R10 is negative (only Version 2; Fig. 3; Table 4), which is necessary to satisfy the above expression. One would be motivated to have the optical photography lens assembly satisfy -75.0 < R10*N5/d5s < -18.0 for the purpose of having the proper aperture size to achieve the intended optical properties by blocking extraneous light penetrating into the ribs of the lenses (¶0069 of Son).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the optical photography lens assembly satisfy -75.0 < R10*N5/d5s < -18.0 for the purpose of having the proper aperture size to achieve the intended optical properties by blocking extraneous light penetrating into the ribs of the lenses (¶0069 of Son).
Regarding claim 3, Zhou in view of Son discloses the optical photography lens assembly according to claim 1, including the at least one spacing element, as set forth above. Son further teaches the at least one spacing element (SP1-SP8) further comprises a first spacing element (SP1; Fig. 21; ¶0165) disposed between the first lens (1000) and the second lens (2000) and in direct contact with an image side of the first lens (1000) (Fig. 21).
Neither Zhou nor Son explicitly disclose a spacing EP01 between a front-end surface of the lens barrel and the first spacing element, a center thickness CT1 of the first lens on the optical axis and a center thickness CT2 of the second lens on the optical axis satisfy: 3.5 < (EP01+CT2)/CT1 < 5.0.
However, 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), see MPEP 2144.05. In this case Zhou in view of Son has all the claimed elements of an optical photography lens assembly, fulfilling the general conditions of the claim. One would be motivated to have the optical photography lens assembly satisfy 3.5 < (EP01+CT2)/CT1 < 5.0 for the purpose of mounting the lenses in the lens barrel so that they are spaced apart from one another by predetermined distances (¶0065 of Son) to achieve the intended optical and mechanical properties.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the optical photography lens assembly satisfy 3.5 < (EP01+CT2)/CT1 < 5.0 for the purpose of mounting the lenses in the lens barrel so that they are spaced apart from one another by predetermined distances (¶0065 of Son) to achieve the intended optical and mechanical properties.
Regarding claim 6, Zhou in view of Son discloses the optical photography lens assembly according to claim 1, including the at least one spacing element, as set forth above. Son further teaches the at least one spacing element (SP1-SP8) further comprises a second spacing element (SP2; Fig. 21; ¶0165) disposed between the second lens (2000) and the third lens (3000) and in direct contact with an image side of the second lens (2000) (Fig. 21).
Neither Zhou nor Son explicitly disclose a combined focal length f12 of the first lens and the second lens, an outer diameter D2m of an image-side surface of the second spacing element, and an inner diameter d2m of the image-side surface of the second spacing element satisfy: 7.0 < f12/(D2m-d2m) < 17.5.
However, 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), see MPEP 2144.05. In this case Zhou in view of Son has all the claimed elements of an optical photography lens assembly, fulfilling the general conditions of the claim. Zhou further discloses f12 is positive (Fig. 3; Table 4), which is necessary to satisfy the above expression. One would be motivated to have the optical photography lens assembly satisfy 7.0 < f12/(D2m-d2m) < 17.5 for the purpose of fitting the spacing element between the lenses such that the optical axes of the lenses can be easily aligned with the optical axis of the optical system (¶0065 of Son) and having the proper aperture size to achieve the intended optical properties by blocking extraneous light penetrating into the ribs of the lenses (¶0069 of Son).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the optical photography lens assembly satisfy 7.0 < f12/(D2m-d2m) < 17.5 for the purpose of fitting the spacing element between the lenses such that the optical axes of the lenses can be easily aligned with the optical axis of the optical system (¶0065 of Son) and having the proper aperture size to achieve the intended optical properties by blocking extraneous light penetrating into the ribs of the lenses (¶0069 of Son).
Regarding claim 7, Zhou in view of Son discloses the optical photography lens assembly according to claim 1, including the at least one spacing element, as set forth above. Son further teaches the at least one spacing element (SP1-SP8) further comprises a second spacing element (SP2; Fig. 21; ¶0165) disposed between the second lens (2000) and the third lens (3000) and in direct contact with an image side of the second lens (2000) (Fig. 21).
Neither Zhou nor Son explicitly disclose an air spacing T23 between the second lens and the third lens on the optical axis, an air spacing T34 between the third lens and the fourth lens on the optical axis, a center thickness CT3 of the third lens on the optical axis, and a spacing EP23 between the second spacing element and the third spacing element satisfy: 1.5 < (T23+CT3+T34)/EP23 < 2.0.
However, 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), see MPEP 2144.05. In this case Zhou in view of Son has all the claimed elements of an optical photography lens assembly, fulfilling the general conditions of the claim. One would be motivated to have the optical photography lens assembly satisfy 1.5 < (T23+CT3+T34)/EP23 < 2.0 for the purpose of mounting the lenses in the lens barrel so that they are spaced apart from one another by predetermined distances (¶0065 of Son) to achieve the intended optical and mechanical properties.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the optical photography lens assembly satisfy 1.5 < (T23+CT3+T34)/EP23 < 2.0 for the purpose of mounting the lenses in the lens barrel so that they are spaced apart from one another by predetermined distances (¶0065 of Son) to achieve the intended optical and mechanical properties.
Regarding claim 8, Zhou in view of Son discloses the optical photography lens assembly according to claim 1, including the at least one spacing element, as set forth above. Son further teaches the at least one spacing element (SP1-SP8) further comprises a fourth spacing element (SP4; Fig. 21; ¶0165) disposed between the fourth lens (4000) and the fifth lens (5000) and in direct contact with an image side of the fourth lens (4000) (Fig. 21), and a fifth spacing element (SP5; Fig. 21; ¶0165) disposed between the fifth lens (5000) and the sixth lens (6000) and in direct contact with an image side of the fifth lens (5000) (Fig. 21).
Neither Zhou nor Son explicitly disclose a spacing EP45 between the fourth spacing element and the fifth spacing element, a maximal thickness CP5 of the fifth spacing element, and a center thickness CT5 of the fifth lens on the optical axis satisfy: 1.5 < (EP45+CP5)/CT5 < 2.5.
However, 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), see MPEP 2144.05. In this case Zhou in view of Son has all the claimed elements of an optical photography lens assembly, fulfilling the general conditions of the claim. One would be motivated to have the optical photography lens assembly satisfy 1.5 < (EP45+CP5)/CT5 < 2.5 for the purpose of mounting the lenses in the lens barrel so that they are spaced apart from one another by predetermined distances (¶0065 of Son) to achieve the intended optical and mechanical properties.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the optical photography lens assembly satisfy 1.5 < (EP45+CP5)/CT5 < 2.5 for the purpose of mounting the lenses in the lens barrel so that they are spaced apart from one another by predetermined distances (¶0065 of Son) to achieve the intended optical and mechanical properties.
Regarding claim 9, Zhou in view of Son discloses the optical photography lens assembly according to claim 1, including the at least one spacing element, as set forth above. Son further teaches the at least one spacing element (SP1-SP8) further comprises a fifth spacing element (SP5; Fig. 21; ¶0165) disposed between the fifth lens (5000) and the sixth lens (6000) and in direct contact with an image side of the fifth lens (5000) (Fig. 21; ¶0165), and a sixth spacing element (SP6; Fig. 21; ¶0165) disposed an image side of the sixth lens (6000) and in direct contact with the image side of the sixth lens (6000) (Fig. 21).
Neither Zhou nor Son explicitly disclose an air spacing T56 between the fifth lens and the sixth lens on the optical axis and a spacing EP56 between the fifth spacing element and the sixth spacing element satisfy: 0.9 < T56/EP56 < 2.1.
However, 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), see MPEP 2144.05. In this case Zhou in view of Son has all the claimed elements of an optical photography lens assembly, fulfilling the general conditions of the claim. One would be motivated to have the optical photography lens assembly satisfy 0.9 < T56/EP56 < 2.1 for the purpose of mounting the lenses in the lens barrel so that they are spaced apart from one another by predetermined distances (¶0065 of Son) to achieve the intended optical and mechanical properties.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the optical photography lens assembly satisfy 0.9 < T56/EP56 < 2.1 for the purpose of mounting the lenses in the lens barrel so that they are spaced apart from one another by predetermined distances (¶0065 of Son) to achieve the intended optical and mechanical properties.
Regarding claim 10, Zhou in view of Son discloses the optical photography lens assembly according to claim 1, including the at least one spacing element, as set forth above. Son further teaches the at least one spacing element (SP1-SP8) further comprises a first spacing element (SP1; Fig. 21; ¶0165) disposed between the first lens (1000) and the second lens (2000) and in direct contact with an image side of the first lens (1000) (Fig. 21).
Neither Zhou nor Son explicitly disclose a radius of curvature R1 of an object-side surface of the first lens, an inner diameter d1s of an object-side surface of the first spacing element, and an inner diameter d1m of an image-side surface of the first spacing element satisfy: 31.0 < R1/(d1s-d1m) < 33.5.
However, 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), see MPEP 2144.05. In this case Zhou in view of Son has all the claimed elements of an optical photography lens assembly, fulfilling the general conditions of the claim. One would be motivated to have the optical photography lens assembly satisfy 31.0 < R1/(d1s-d1m) < 33.5 for the purpose of having the proper aperture size to achieve the intended optical properties by blocking extraneous light penetrating into the ribs of the lenses (¶0069 of Son).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the optical photography lens assembly satisfy 31.0 < R1/(d1s-d1m) < 33.5 for the purpose of having the proper aperture size to achieve the intended optical properties by blocking extraneous light penetrating into the ribs of the lenses (¶0069 of Son).
Regarding claim 11, Zhou in view of Son discloses the optical photography lens assembly according to claim 1, including the at least one spacing element, as set forth above. Son further teaches the at least one spacing element (SP1-SP8) further comprises the first spacing element (SP1; Fig. 21; ¶0165) disposed between the first lens (1000) and the second lens (2000) and in direct contact with the image side of the first lens (1000) (Fig. 21), and a second spacing element (SP2; Fig. 21; ¶0165) disposed between the second lens (2000) and the third lens (3000) and in direct contact with an image side of the second lens (2000) (Fig. 21).
Neither Zhou nor Son explicitly disclose a spacing EP12 between the first spacing element and the second spacing element and the spacing EP01 between the front-end surface of the lens barrel and the first spacing element satisfy: 0.5 < EP12/EP01 < 1.0.
However, 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), see MPEP 2144.05. In this case Zhou in view of Son has all the claimed elements of an optical photography lens assembly, fulfilling the general conditions of the claim. One would be motivated to have the optical photography lens assembly satisfy 0.5 < EP12/EP01 < 1.0 for the purpose of mounting the lenses in the lens barrel so that they are spaced apart from one another by predetermined distances (¶0065 of Son) to achieve the intended optical and mechanical properties.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the optical photography lens assembly satisfy 0.5 < EP12/EP01 < 1.0 for the purpose of mounting the lenses in the lens barrel so that they are spaced apart from one another by predetermined distances (¶0065 of Son) to achieve the intended optical and mechanical properties.
Regarding claim 12, Zhou in view of Son discloses the optical photography lens assembly according to claim 1, including the at least one spacing element, as set forth above. Son further teaches the at least one spacing element (SP1-SP8) further comprises a fourth spacing element (SP4; Fig. 21; ¶0165) disposed between the fourth lens (4000) and the fifth lens (5000) and in direct contact with an image side of the fourth lens (4000) (Fig. 21).
Neither Zhou nor Son explicitly disclose a radius of curvature R7 of an object-side surface of the fourth lens, a radius of curvature R8 of an image-side surface of the fourth lens, an outer diameter D4s of an object-side surface of the fourth spacing element, and an outer diameter D4m of an image-side surface of the fourth spacing element satisfy: 1.5 < D4s/R7 + D4m/R8 ≤ 2.5.
However, 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), see MPEP 2144.05. In this case Zhou in view of Son has all the claimed elements of an optical photography lens assembly, fulfilling the general conditions of the claim. Asami further discloses at least one of R7 and R8 is positive (Fig. 3; Table 4), which is necessary to satisfy the above expression. One would be motivated to have the optical photography lens assembly satisfy 1.5 < D4s/R7 + D4m/R8 ≤ 2.5 for the purpose of properly fitting the lens and the spacing elements into the lens barrel and fitting the spacing element between the lenses such that the optical axes of the lenses can be easily aligned with the optical axis of the optical system (¶0065 of Son).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the optical photography lens assembly satisfy 1.5 < D4s/R7 + D4m/R8 ≤ 2.5 for the purpose of properly fitting the lens and the spacing elements into the lens barrel and fitting the spacing element between the lenses such that the optical axes of the lenses can be easily aligned with the optical axis of the optical system (¶0065 of Son).
Regarding claim 13, Zhou in view of Son discloses the optical photography lens assembly according to claim 1, including the at least one spacing element, as set forth above. Son further teaches the at least one spacing element (SP1-SP8) further comprises a fifth spacing element (SP5; Fig. 21; ¶0165) disposed between the fifth lens (5000) and the sixth lens (6000) and in direct contact with an image side of the fifth lens (5000) (Fig. 21).
Neither Zhou nor Son explicitly disclose a radius of curvature R9 of an object-side surface of the fifth lens, a refractive index N5 of the fifth lens, and an outer diameter D5s of an object-side surface of the fifth spacing element satisfy: 0.4 < R9*N5/D5s < 0.6.
However, 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), see MPEP 2144.05. In this case Zhou in view of Son has all the claimed elements of an optical photography lens assembly, fulfilling the general conditions of the claim. Zhou further discloses R9 is positive (only Version 1; Fig. 3; Table 4), which is necessary to satisfy the above expression. One would be motivated to have the optical photography lens assembly satisfy 0.4 < R9*N5/D5s < 0.6 for the purpose of properly fitting the lens and the spacing elements into the lens barrel and fitting the spacing element between the lenses such that the optical axes of the lenses can be easily aligned with the optical axis of the optical system (¶0065 of Son).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the optical photography lens assembly satisfy 0.4 < R9*N5/D5s < 0.6 for the purpose of properly fitting the lens and the spacing elements into the lens barrel and fitting the spacing element between the lenses such that the optical axes of the lenses can be easily aligned with the optical axis of the optical system (¶0065 of Son).
Regarding claim 14, Zhou in view of Son discloses the optical photography lens assembly according to claim 1, including the at least one spacing element, as set forth above. Son further teaches the at least one spacing element (SP1-SP8) further comprises a fifth spacing element (SP5; Fig. 21; ¶0165) disposed between the fifth lens (5000) and the sixth lens (6000) and in direct contact with an image side of the fifth lens (5000) (Fig. 21).
Neither Zhou nor Son explicitly disclose an effective focal length f6 of the sixth lens and an inner diameter d5m of an image-side surface of the fifth spacing element satisfy: -3.5 < f6/d5m < -0.9.
However, 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), see MPEP 2144.05. In this case Zhou in view of Son has all the claimed elements of an optical photography lens assembly, fulfilling the general conditions of the claim. Zhou further discloses f6 is negative (Versions 1 and 2; Fig. 3; Table 4), which is necessary to satisfy the above expression. One would be motivated to have the optical photography lens assembly satisfy -3.5 < f6/d5m < -0.9 for the purpose of having the proper aperture size to achieve the intended optical properties by blocking extraneous light penetrating into the ribs of the lenses (¶0069 of Son).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the optical photography lens assembly satisfy -3.5 < f6/d5m < -0.9 for the purpose of having the proper aperture size to achieve the intended optical properties by blocking extraneous light penetrating into the ribs of the lenses (¶0069 of Son).
Regarding claim 15, Zhou in view of Son discloses the optical photography lens assembly according to claim 1, as set forth above. Zhou further discloses a maximal height L of the lens barrel along a direction of the optical axis and a sum of center thicknesses ∑CT of all lenses in the lens group (Fig. 3) on the optical axis satisfy: 1.6 < L/∑CT < 1.8 (L is being approximated as the distance from the object-side surface of the first lens E1 to the image-side surface of the last lens in the system E9, therefore L/∑CT = 1.79; Fig. 3; Table 4).
Regarding claim 16, Zhou in view of Son discloses the optical photography lens assembly according to claim 1, including the at least one spacing element comprising the third spacing element, as set forth above.
Neither Zhou nor Son explicitly disclose an outer diameter D3s of the object-side surface of the third spacing element, the radius of curvature R5 of the object-side surface of the third lens, the radius of curvature R6 of the image-side surface of the third lens, and an outer diameter D3m of an image-side surface of the third spacing element satisfy: 1.7 < D3s/R5 + D3m/R6 < 2.9.
However, 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), see MPEP 2144.05. In this case Zhou in view of Son has all the claimed elements of an optical photography lens assembly, fulfilling the general conditions of the claim. Zhou further discloses at least one of R5 and R6 is positive (Fig. 3; Table 4), which is necessary to satisfy the above expression. One would be motivated to have the optical photography lens assembly satisfy 1.7 < D3s/R5 + D3m/R6 < 2.9 for the purpose of properly fitting the lens and the spacing elements into the lens barrel and fitting the spacing element between the lenses such that the optical axes of the lenses can be easily aligned with the optical axis of the optical system (¶0065 of Son).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the optical photography lens assembly satisfy 1.7 < D3s/R5 + D3m/R6 < 2.9 for the purpose of properly fitting the lens and the spacing elements into the lens barrel and fitting the spacing element between the lenses such that the optical axes of the lenses can be easily aligned with the optical axis of the optical system (¶0065 of Son).
Regarding claim 17, Zhou in view of Son discloses the optical photography lens assembly according to claim 1, including the at least one spacing element, as set forth above. Son further teaches the at least one spacing element (SP1-SP8) further comprises the fourth spacing element (SP4; Fig. 21; ¶0165) disposed between the fourth lens (4000) and the fifth lens (5000) and in direct contact with the image side of the fourth lens (4000) (Fig. 21).
Neither Zhou nor Son explicitly disclose a combined focal length f45 of the fourth lens and the fifth lens, the outer diameter D4s of the object-side surface of the fourth spacing element, and an inner diameter d4s of the object-side surface of the fourth spacing element satisfy: 2.0 < f45/(D4s-d4s) < 6.5.
However, 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), see MPEP 2144.05. In this case Zhou in view of Son has all the claimed elements of an optical photography lens assembly, fulfilling the general conditions of the claim. Zhou further discloses f45 is positive (Versions 1 and 2; Fig. 3; Table 4), which is necessary to satisfy the above expression. One would be motivated to have the optical photography lens assembly satisfy 2.0 < f45/(D4s-d4s) < 6.5 for the purpose of fitting the spacing element between the lenses such that the optical axes of the lenses can be easily aligned with the optical axis of the optical system (¶0065 of Son) and having the proper aperture size to achieve the intended optical properties by blocking extraneous light penetrating into the ribs of the lenses (¶0069 of Son).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the optical photography lens assembly satisfy 2.0 < f45/(D4s-d4s) < 6.5 for the purpose of fitting the spacing element between the lenses such that the optical axes of the lenses can be easily aligned with the optical axis of the optical system (¶0065 of Son) and having the proper aperture size to achieve the intended optical properties by blocking extraneous light penetrating into the ribs of the lenses (¶0069 of Son).
Regarding claim 18, Zhou in view of Son discloses the optical photography lens assembly according to claim 1, including the at least one spacing element, as set forth above. Son further teaches the at least one spacing element (SP1-SP8) further comprises a fifth spacing element (SP5; Fig. 21; ¶0165) disposed between the fifth lens (5000) and the sixth lens (6000) and in direct contact with an image side of the fifth lens (5000) (Fig. 21).
Neither Zhou nor Son explicitly disclose a combined focal length f56 of the fifth lens and the sixth lens and an outer diameter D5m of an image-side surface of the fifth spacing element satisfy: 0.8 < f56/D5m < 2.4.
However, 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), see MPEP 2144.05. In this case Zhou in view of Son has all the claimed elements of an optical photography lens assembly, fulfilling the general conditions of the claim. Zhou further discloses f56 is positive (only Version 2; Fig. 3; Table 4), which is necessary to satisfy the above expression. One would be motivated to have the optical photography lens assembly satisfy 0.8 < f56/D5m < 2.4 for the purpose of properly fitting the lens and the spacing elements into the lens barrel and fitting the spacing element between the lenses such that the optical axes of the lenses can be easily aligned with the optical axis of the optical system (¶0065 of Son).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the optical photography lens assembly satisfy 0.8 < f56/D5m < 2.4 for the purpose of properly fitting the lens and the spacing elements into the lens barrel and fitting the spacing element between the lenses such that the optical axes of the lenses can be easily aligned with the optical axis of the optical system (¶0065 of Son).
Regarding claim 19, Zhou in view of Son discloses the optical photography lens assembly according to claim 1, including the at least one spacing element, as set forth above. Son further teaches the at least one spacing element (SP1-SP8) further comprises a fifth spacing element (SP5; Fig. 21; ¶0165) disposed between the fifth lens (5000) and the sixth lens (6000) and in direct contact with an image side of the fifth lens (5000).
Neither Zhou nor Son explicitly disclose an effective focal length f5 of the fifth lens, a radius of curvature R10 of an image-side surface of the fifth lens, and an inner diameter d5s of an object-side surface of the fifth spacing element satisfy: 1.1 < f5/R10 + f5/d5s < 3.0.
However, 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), see MPEP 2144.05. In this case Zhou in view of Son has all the claimed elements of an optical photography lens assembly, fulfilling the general conditions of the claim. One would be motivated to have the optical photography lens assembly satisfy 1.1 < f5/R10 + f5/d5s < 3.0 for the purpose of properly fitting the lens and the spacing elements into the lens barrel and fitting the spacing element between the lenses such that the optical axes of the lenses can be easily aligned with the optical axis of the optical system (¶0065 of Son).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the optical photography lens assembly satisfy 1.1 < f5/R10 + f5/d5s < 3.0 for the purpose of properly fitting the lens and the spacing elements into the lens barrel and fitting the spacing element between the lenses such that the optical axes of the lenses can be easily aligned with the optical axis of the optical system (¶0065 of Son).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Huang et al. (US 20220179177 A1), Sekine at al. (US 20220155568 A1), You et al. (US 20210364754 A1), Lyu et al. (US 20200233186 A1), Baik et al. (US 20190369366 A1), Asami et al. (US 20140204479 A1), and Matsuo (US 4274711 A) disclose similar lens assemblies which, in combination with Son, teach the limitations of at least independent claim 1.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATASHA NIGAM whose telephone number is (571)270-5423. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8-5.
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, Ricky Mack can be reached at (571)272-2333. 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.
/NATASHA NIGAM/Examiner, Art Unit 2872 July 16th, 2026
/RICKY L MACK/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Prosecution Insights