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 § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-3 and 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moon et al. (International Patent Publication WO 2024/191136 – machine translation – hereinafter referred to as “Moon”).
Regarding claim 1, Moon teaches a lens module (Figure 1 camera module 1000, [0040]), defining a central axis (Figure 3 optical axis Z1), an X axis (Figure 5 Y axis), a Y axis (Figure 5 X axis), an object side (Figure 3 incident surface RS1 side) and an image side (Figure 3 image sensor 131 side), wherein the central axis, the X axis and the Y axis are perpendicular to each other (Figures 3 and 5 Z1, X, and Y axes are perpendicular to each other), the image side is opposite to the object side (Figure 3 incident surface RS1 is opposite to image sensor 131), and the lens module comprises:
a lens barrel (Figure 1 housing 1400);
an optical lens assembly (Figure 3 lens assembly 1200) disposed in the lens barrel, wherein the optical lens assembly includes at least one lens (Figure 3 lens 53, [0052]);
an optical spacer (Figure 5 spacer 52, [0075]) disposed in the lens barrel and located on an object-side surface of the lens (Figure 3 spacer 52 is on object-side surface of lens 53); and
an optical sensor (Figure 3 image sensor 131) disposed in the lens barrel and located on an image plane (Figures 1 and 3 image sensor 131 is in housing 1400 and at the image plane);
wherein the optical spacer (Figure 8 spacer 52) includes an annular body (Figure 8 spacer 52 is an annular body with hole 52A, [0083]) having an outer periphery (Figure 8 outer edge of spacer 52) and an inner periphery (Figure 8 inner edge of spacer 52), the outer periphery surrounds the inner periphery (Figure 8 outer edge of spacer 52 surrounds inner edge of spacer 52), and an opening is formed around the inner periphery (Figure 8 hole 52A);
the outer periphery includes first and second cut edges (Figure 8 sides CP11, CP12, [0084] outer shape of spacer 52 has D-cut shape), which are respectively contracted toward a center of the optical spacer along the Y-axis (Figure 8 outer periphery of spacer 52 is contracted along X-axis), and the inner periphery includes third and fourth cut edges (Figure 8 sides CP1, CP2, [0083]), which are respectively contracted toward the center of the optical spacer along the Y-axis (Figure 8 inner periphery of spacer 52 is contracted along X-axis); and
the distance between the first and second cut edges is D2 (Figure 8 length D2), the distance between the third and fourth cut edges is D1 (Figure 8 length D4).
Moon fails to explicitly teach 0.05≦D1/D2≦0.95. However, optimizing D1/D2 is well within the bounds of normal experimentation. See MPEP 2144.05 II (A). “[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to dis-cover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.” In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). Furthermore, “[a] particular parameter must first be recognized as a result-effective variable, i.e., a variable which achieves a recognized result, before the determination of the optimum or workable ranges of said variable might be characterized as routine experimentation.” In re Antonie, 559 F.2d 618, 195 USPQ 6 (CCPA 1977). In the case at hand, Moon teaches balancing the widths (Figure 8 K1,K2) of overlapping areas (R1,R2) of spacer 52 and lens 53 as a variable which achieves a recognized result ([0087]) of blocking light having an abnormal path while preventing an increase in flare intensity or degradation of light characteristics ([0087]). Therefore, the prior art teaches adjusting D1/D2and identifies said sizes/ratios as result-effective variables. Furthermore, the claimed range is so large that it essentially covers spacers with a hole nearly the size of the spacer to spacers that have a minimal hole size. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective time of filing to modify spacer taught by Moon such that 0.05≦D1/D2≦0.95 since it is not inventive to dis-cover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.
Regarding claim 2, Moon teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 1. Moon further teaches wherein all of the first to fourth cut sides have a flat surface (Figure 8 sides CP11, CP12, CP1, and CP2 are all flat).
Regarding claim 3, Moon teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 1. Moon further teaches the inner periphery further includes four corners (Figure 8 corners of hole 52A), which respectively expand in opposite directions toward the center of the optical spacer (Figure 8 corners of hole 52A expand in opposite directions toward the center of spacer 52).
Regarding claim 10, Moon teaches an electronic device (Figure 17 mobile terminal 1500, [0123]), comprising:
a housing (Figure 15 outside of mobile terminal 1500 is a housing);
a lens module (Figure 1 camera module 1000) disposed in the housing ([0124] camera module 1000 is in housing of mobile terminal 1500), wherein:
the lens module defines a central axis (Figure 3 optical axis Z1), an X axis (Figure 5 Y axis), a Y axis (Figure 5 X axis), an object side (Figure 3 incident surface RS1 side) and an image side (Figure 3 image sensor 131 side), wherein the central axis, the X axis and the Y axis are perpendicular to each other (Figures 3 and 5 Z1, X, and Y axes are perpendicular to each other), the image side is opposite to the object side (Figure 3 incident surface RS1 is opposite to image sensor 131), and the lens module comprises:
a lens barrel (Figure 3 housing 1400);
an optical lens assembly (Figure 3 lens assembly 1200) disposed in the lens barrel, wherein the optical lens assembly includes at least one lens (Figure 3 lens 53, [0052]);
an optical spacer (Figure 5 spacer 52, [0075]) disposed in the lens barrel and located on an object-side surface of the lens (Figure 3 spacer 52 is on object-side surface of lens 53); and
an optical sensor (Figure 3 image sensor 131) disposed in the lens barrel and located on an image plane (Figures 1 and 3 image sensor 131 is in housing 1400 and at the image plane);
wherein the optical spacer (Figure 8 spacer 52) includes an annular body (Figure 8 spacer 52 is an annular body with hole 52A, [0083]) having an outer periphery (Figure 8 outer edge of spacer 52) and an inner periphery (Figure 8 inner edge of spacer 52), the outer periphery surrounds the inner periphery (Figure 8 outer edge of spacer 52 surrounds inner edge of spacer 52), and an opening is formed around the inner periphery (Figure 8 hole 52A);
the outer periphery includes first and second cut edges (Figure 8 sides CP11, CP12, [0084] outer shape of spacer 52 has D-cut shape), which are respectively contracted toward a center of the optical spacer along the Y-axis (Figure 8 outer periphery of spacer 52 is contracted along X-axis), and the inner periphery includes third and fourth cut edges (Figure 8 sides CP1, CP2, [0083]), which are respectively contracted toward the center of the optical spacer along the Y-axis (Figure 8 inner periphery of spacer 52 is contracted along X-axis); and
the distance between the first and second cut edges is D2 (Figure 8 length D2), the distance between the third and fourth cut edges is D1 (Figure 8 length D4); and
a control component disposed in the housing and electrically connected to the optical sensor ([0126]-[0127] camera module 1000 processes image or video obtained from the image sensor).
Moon fails to explicitly teach 0.05≦D1/D2≦0.95. However, optimizing D1/D2 is well within the bounds of normal experimentation. See MPEP 2144.05 II (A). “[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to dis-cover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.” In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). Furthermore, “[a] particular parameter must first be recognized as a result-effective variable, i.e., a variable which achieves a recognized result, before the determination of the optimum or workable ranges of said variable might be characterized as routine experimentation.” In re Antonie, 559 F.2d 618, 195 USPQ 6 (CCPA 1977). In the case at hand, Moon teaches balancing the widths (Figure 8 K1,K2) of overlapping areas (R1,R2) of spacer 52 and lens 53 as a variable which achieves a recognized result ([0087]) of blocking light having an abnormal path while preventing an increase in flare intensity or degradation of light characteristics ([0087]). Therefore, the prior art teaches adjusting D1/D2and identifies said sizes/ratios as result-effective variables. Furthermore, the claimed range is so large that it essentially covers spacers with a hole nearly the size of the spacer to spacers that have a minimal hole size. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective time of filing to modify spacer taught by Moon such that 0.05≦D1/D2≦0.95 since it is not inventive to dis-cover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.
Regarding claim 11, Moon teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 10. Moon further teaches wherein all of the first to fourth cut sides have a flat surface (Figure 8 sides CP11, CP12, CP1, and CP2 are all flat).
Regarding claim 12, Moon teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 10. Moon further teaches the inner periphery further includes four corners (Figure 8 corners of hole 52A), which respectively expand in opposite directions toward the center of the optical spacer (Figure 8 corners of hole 52A expand in opposite directions toward the center of spacer 52).
Claims 4, 9, 13, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moon (International Patent Publication WO 2024/191136) in view of Wu et al. (Chinese Patent Publication CN 214225641 – machine translation – hereinafter referred to as “Wu”).
Regarding claim 4, Moon teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 3. Moon fails to teach both of the third and fourth cut edges have a wavy surface. However, Wu is related to Moon with respect to an optical spacer to suppress stray light (Figure 1) and teaches both of the third and fourth cut edges have a wavy surface (Figure 1 top and bottom edges of hole 11 have a wavy surface, [0049]). Wu further teaches using a wavy surface to disrupt and suppress the reflection of stray light preventing light spots and improving image quality ([0049]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the optical spacer taught by Moon by adding wavy surfaces as taught by Wu in order to disrupt and suppress the reflection of stray light and improve image quality (Wu [0049]).
Regarding claim 9, Moon teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 1. Moon fail to teach the inner periphery includes an inner surface provided with concentric annular microstructures, radial microstructures, or V-shaped microstructures. However, However, Wu is related to Moon with respect to an optical spacer to suppress stray light (Figure 1) and teaches the inner periphery includes an inner surface provided with concentric annular microstructures, radial microstructures, or V-shaped microstructures (Figure 7, [0066]-[0067] tiny recessed structures with a serrated or wedge structure). Wu further teaches using microstructures to better suppress stray light ([0066]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the optical spacer taught by Moon by using the V-shaped microstructures taught by Wu in order to better suppress stray light (Wu [0066]).
Regarding claim 13, Moon teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 10. Moon fails to teach both of the third and fourth cut edges have a wavy surface. However, Wu is related to Moon with respect to an optical spacer to suppress stray light (Figure 1) and teaches both of the third and fourth cut edges have a wavy surface (Figure 1 top and bottom edges of hole 11 have a wavy surface, [0049]). Wu further teaches using a wavy surface to disrupt and suppress the reflection of stray light preventing light spots and improving image quality ([0049]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the optical spacer taught by Moon by adding wavy surfaces as taught by Wu in order to disrupt and suppress the reflection of stray light and improve image quality (Wu [0049]).
Regarding claim 18, Moon teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 10. Moon fail to teach the inner periphery includes an inner surface provided with concentric annular microstructures, radial microstructures, or V-shaped microstructures. However, However, Wu is related to Moon with respect to an optical spacer to suppress stray light (Figure 1) and teaches the inner periphery includes an inner surface provided with concentric annular microstructures, radial microstructures, or V-shaped microstructures (Figure 7, [0066]-[0067] tiny recessed structures with a serrated or wedge structure). Wu further teaches using microstructures to better suppress stray light ([0066]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the optical spacer taught by Moon by using the V-shaped microstructures taught by Wu in order to better suppress stray light (Wu [0066]).
Claims 5 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moon (International Patent Publication WO 2024/191136) in view of Wu (Chinese Patent Publication CN 214225641) in view of Li et al. (Chinese Patent Publication CN 212540768 – machine translation – hereinafter referred to as “Li”).
Regarding claim 5, Moon teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 1. Moon fails to teach the outer periphery further includes fifth and sixth cut edges, which are respectively contracted toward the center of the optical spacer along the X-axis, and the inner spacer further includes seventh and eighth cut edges, which are respectively contracted toward the center of the optical spacer along the X-axis.
However, Li is related to Moon with respect to a light shield and teaches the outer periphery further includes fifth and sixth cut edges (Figure 5 sections 142 on left and right sides of light shield 100 are cut edges), which are respectively contracted toward the center of the optical spacer along the X-axis (Figure 5 sections 142 on left and right sides contract toward center of light-shield 100 along the X-axis), and the inner spacer further includes seventh and eighth cut edges (Figure 5 sections 132 on left and right sides of the inner hole of light shield 100 are cut edges), which are respectively contracted toward the center of the optical spacer along the X-axis (Figure 5 sections 132 on left and right sides contract toward center of light-shield 100 along the X-axis). Li further teaches using additional cut edges on the outer periphery to reduce the size of the light shield ([0046]) and addition cut edges on the inner periphery to ensure uniform stress distribution and improve service life ([0061]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the optical spacer taught by Moon adding fifth and sixth cut edges on the outer periphery and seventh and eighth cut edges on the inner periphery as taught by Li in order to reduce the size of the light shield (Li [0046]) and addition cut edges on the inner periphery to ensure uniform stress distribution and improve service life (Li [0061]).
Regarding claim 14, Moon teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 10. Moon fails to teach the outer periphery further includes fifth and sixth cut edges, which are respectively contracted toward the center of the optical spacer along the X-axis, and the inner spacer further includes seventh and eighth cut edges, which are respectively contracted toward the center of the optical spacer along the X-axis.
However, Li is related to Moon with respect to a light shield and teaches the outer periphery further includes fifth and sixth cut edges (Figure 5 sections 142 on left and right sides of light shield 100 are cut edges), which are respectively contracted toward the center of the optical spacer along the X-axis (Figure 5 sections 142 on left and right sides contract toward center of light-shield 100 along the X-axis), and the inner spacer further includes seventh and eighth cut edges (Figure 5 sections 132 on left and right sides of the inner hole of light shield 100 are cut edges), which are respectively contracted toward the center of the optical spacer along the X-axis (Figure 5 sections 132 on left and right sides contract toward center of light-shield 100 along the X-axis). Li further teaches using additional cut edges on the outer periphery to reduce the size of the light shield ([0046]) and addition cut edges on the inner periphery to ensure uniform stress distribution and improve service life ([0061]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the optical spacer taught by Moon adding fifth and sixth cut edges on the outer periphery and seventh and eighth cut edges on the inner periphery as taught by Li in order to reduce the size of the light shield (Li [0046]) and addition cut edges on the inner periphery to ensure uniform stress distribution and improve service life (Li [0061]).
Claims 6-7 and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moon (International Patent Publication WO 2024/191136) in view of Li (Chinese Patent Publication CN 212540768) as applied to claims 5 and 14 above, and in further view of Wu (Chinese Patent Publication CN 214225641).
Regarding claim 6, Moon and Li teach all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 5. Moon and Li fail to teach all of the third, fourth, seventh and eighth cut edges have a wavy surface. However, Wu is related to Moon with respect to an optical spacer to suppress stray light (Figure 4) and teaches all of the third, fourth, seventh and eighth cut edges have a wavy surface (Figure 4 all edges of hole 11 have a wavy surface, [0049]). Wu further teaches using a wavy surface to disrupt and suppress the reflection of stray light preventing light spots and improving image quality ([0049]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the optical spacer taught by Moon and Li by adding wavy surfaces as taught by Wu in order to disrupt and suppress the reflection of stray light and improve image quality (Wu [0049]).
Regarding claim 7, Moon, Li, and Wu teach all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 6. Moon further teaches the inner periphery further includes four corners, respectively forming diagonal arcs (Figure 8 corners of hole 52A are diagonal arcs).
Regarding claim 15, Moon and Li teach all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 14. Moon and Li fail to teach all of the third, fourth, seventh and eighth cut edges have a wavy surface. However, Wu is related to Moon with respect to an optical spacer to suppress stray light (Figure 4) and teaches all of the third, fourth, seventh and eighth cut edges have a wavy surface (Figure 4 all edges of hole 11 have a wavy surface, [0049]). Wu further teaches using a wavy surface to disrupt and suppress the reflection of stray light preventing light spots and improving image quality ([0049]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the optical spacer taught by Moon and Li by adding wavy surfaces as taught by Wu in order to disrupt and suppress the reflection of stray light and improve image quality (Wu [0049]).
Regarding claim 16, Moon, Li, and Wu teach all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 15. Moon further teaches the inner periphery further includes four corners, respectively forming diagonal arcs (Figure 8 corners of hole 52A are diagonal arcs).
Claims 8 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moon (International Patent Publication WO 2024/191136) in view of Li (Chinese Patent Publication CN 212540768) as applied to claims 5 and 14 above, and in further view of Yang et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20220221682 – hereinafter referred to as “Yang”).
Regarding claim 8, Moon and Li teach all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 5. Moon further teaches the inner periphery further includes four corners (Figure 8 corners of hole 52A), each of which expands in the opposite direction toward the center of the optical spacer (Figure 8 corners of hole 52A expand in opposite directions toward the center of spacer 52) to form a transmission portion (Figure 8 hole 52A).
Moon and Li fail to each all of the third, fourth, seventh and eighth cut edges have an arc-shaped surface. However, Yang is related to Moon with respect to an optical spacer (Figure 7) and teaches all of the third, fourth, seventh and eighth cut edges have an arc-shaped surface (Figure 7 all edges of inner surface 307-5 are arc-shaped, [0069]). Yang further teaches having all inner surfaces be arc-shaped in order to minimize a flare phenomenon and have sufficient opening to achieve a higher f-number ([0073]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the optical spacer taught by Moon and Li by having all the inner edges be arc shaped as taught by Yang in order to minimize a flare phenomenon and have sufficient opening to achieve a higher f-number (Yang [0073]).
Regarding claim 17, Moon and Li teach all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 14. Moon further teaches the inner periphery further includes four corners (Figure 8 corners of hole 52A), each of which expands in the opposite direction toward the center of the optical spacer (Figure 8 corners of hole 52A expand in opposite directions toward the center of spacer 52) to form a transmission portion (Figure 8 hole 52A).
Moon and Li fail to each all of the third, fourth, seventh and eighth cut edges have an arc-shaped surface. However, Yang is related to Moon with respect to an optical spacer (Figure 7) and teaches all of the third, fourth, seventh and eighth cut edges have an arc-shaped surface (Figure 7 all edges of inner surface 307-5 are arc-shaped, [0069]). Yang further teaches having all inner surfaces be arc-shaped in order to minimize a flare phenomenon and have sufficient opening to achieve a higher f-number ([0073]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the optical spacer taught by Moon and Li by having all the inner edges be arc shaped as taught by Yang in order to minimize a flare phenomenon and have sufficient opening to achieve a higher f-number (Yang [0073]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Yang et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2023/0408738) discloses an optical spacer having various shapes similar to the instant invention. Yoo et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2022/0350115) discloses various shapes of the inner edge of an optical spacer similar to the instant invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEX PARK RICKEL whose telephone number is (703)756-4561. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30 a.m. - 6 p.m. ET.
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, Bumsuk Won can be reached at (571)272-2713. 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.
Alex Rickel
Examiner
Art Unit 2872
/A.P.R./ Examiner, Art Unit 2872
/BUMSUK WON/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Prosecution Insights