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.
Information Disclosure Statement
Acknowledgement is made of receipt of Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO-1449) filed 01/18/2025. An initialed copy is attached to this Office Action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5, 7-9, 11 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Li et al., (Li hereafter) (CN108490582B).
With respect to Claim 1, Li discloses an imaging lens system comprising: a first lens (10, Figure 1) having a refractive power (¶[0078]); a second lens (20, Figure 1) having a refractive power (¶[0079]) and a concave image-side surface in a paraxial region thereof (¶[0079]); a third lens (30, Figure 1) having a refractive power (¶[0081]); a fourth lens (40, Figure 1) having a refractive power; a fifth lens (50, Figure 1) having a refractive power (¶[0082]); and a sixth lens (60, Figure 1) having a refractive power and a convex object-side surface in a paraxial region thereof (¶[0083]), wherein the first to sixth lenses (10-60, Figure 1) are sequentially disposed in ascending numerical order along an optical axis of the imaging lens system from an object side of the imaging lens system toward an imaging plane of the imaging lens system (see Figure 1), a radius of curvature of the image-side surface (Table 1) of the second lens (20, Figure 1) at the optical axis is greater (Table 1) than a radius of curvature of an object-side surface (Table 1) of the second lens (20, Figure 1) at the optical axis, and a radius of curvature of the object-side surface (Table 1) of the sixth lens (60, Figure 1) at the optical axis is greater than a radius of curvature of an object-side surface (Table 1) of the fifth lens (50, Figure 1) at the optical axis.
With respect to Claim 2, Li further discloses wherein the first lens (10, Figure 1) has a convex object- side surface in a paraxial region thereof (¶[0078]).
With respect to Claim 3, Li further discloses wherein the third lens (30, Figure 1) has a convex object- side surface in a paraxial region thereof (see 30, Figure 1).
With respect to Claim 5, Li further discloses wherein the object-side surface of the fifth lens (50, Figure 1) is concave in a paraxial region thereof (see 50, Figure 1).
With respect to Claim 7, Li discloses an imaging lens system comprising: a first lens (10, Figure 1) having a refractive power; a second lens (20, Figure 1) having a concave image-side surface in a paraxial region thereof; a third lens (30, Figure 1) having a refractive power; a fourth lens (40, Figure 1) having a refractive power; a fifth lens (50, Figure 1) having a negative refractive power; and a sixth lens (60, Figure 1) having a refractive power, wherein the first to sixth lens (60, Figure 1)es are sequentially disposed in ascending numerical order along an optical axis of the imaging lens system from an object side of the imaging lens system toward an imaging plane of the imaging lens system, a radius of curvature of the image-side surface (Table 1) of the second lens (20, Figure 1) at the optical axis is greater than a radius of curvature of an object-side surface (Table 1) of the second lens (20, Figure 1) at the optical axis, a radius of curvature of an object-side surface (Table 1) of the fourth lens (40, Figure 1) at the optical axis is greater than a radius of curvature of the image-side surface (Table 1) of the second lens (20, Figure 1) at the optical axis, and 0.6 < If/f3| < 1.6 is satisfied, where f is a focal length of the imaging lens system, and f3 is a focal length of the third lens (30, Figure 1).
With respect to Claim 8, Li further discloses wherein the first lens (10, Figure 1) has a convex object- side surface in a paraxial region thereof (Figure 1; see also ¶[0078]).
With respect to Claim 9, Li further discloses wherein the third lens (30, Figure 1) has a convex object- side surface in a paraxial region thereof (see Figure 1).
With respect to Claim 11, Li further discloses wherein the fifth lens (50, Figure 1) has a concave object- side surface in a paraxial region thereof (see Figure 1).
With respect to Claim 12, Li further discloses wherein the sixth lens (60, Figure 1) has a convex object- side surface in a paraxial region thereof (see Figure 1).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4, 6 and 10 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
With respect to Claim 4, though Li (CN108490582B) discloses “The optical imaging system of claim 1,” Li fails to teach or suggest the aforementioned combination further comprising “wherein the fourth lens has a convex object- side surface in a paraxial region thereof.”
With respect to Claim 6, Li (CN108490582B) discloses “The optical imaging system of claim 1,” Li fails to teach or suggest the aforementioned combination further comprising “wherein the sixth lens has a concave image- side surface in a paraxial region thereof.
With respect to Claim 10, Li (CN108490582B) discloses “The optical imaging system of claim 1,” Li fails to teach or suggest the aforementioned combination further comprising “wherein the object-side surface of the fourth lens is convex in a paraxial region thereof.”
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TAMARA Y WASHINGTON whose telephone number is (571)270-3887. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thur 730-530 EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Stephone Allen can be reached on 571-272-2434. 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.
/TYW/Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2872
/STEPHONE B ALLEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Prosecution Insights